Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow
Transportation Assessment
March 2021
Dougall Baillie Associates 3 Glenfield Road, Kelvin, East Kilbride, G75 0RA P: 01355 266 480 F: 01355 221 991 E: [email protected] W: www.dougallbaillie.com
Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
© DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES LIMITED
Copyright of this document is reserved by Dougall Baillie Associates Limited. Copying of this document is strictly prohibited without the prior authorisation of Dougall Baillie Associates Limited. Assignation of this document is prohibited. The report is personal to the addressee only and can only be relied upon by the addressee. Specific permission in writing must be obtained from Dougall Baillie Associates in order for any party other than that addressee to rely upon this report or any part of this report or any element of its contents.
DBA is quality assured to BS EN ISO 9001(2015) and the company’s Quality Management System is certified by NQA (certificate No. 8891).
Document Control
Document Title: - Proposed Residential Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment
Project Number: - 20033
Project Title: - Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay)
Directory and File Name: - W:\20000s\20033 - Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay)\Admin\Reports\20033-TA-01b.docx
Issue Date Distribution Comments - 12/03/21 Client Team Draft for comment a 19/03/21 Client Team Updated for comment B 24/03/21 Client Team Updated for comment
Document Approval
Originator: Date: 24/03/21
Checked By: Date: 24/03/21
Authorisation: Date: 24/03/21
Page 2 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ...... 4
2 National & Local Policy Framework ...... 6
3 Development Proposals ...... 11
4 Sustainable Transport Assessment ...... 13
5 Data Collection & Abstraction ...... 22
6 Development Generation & Distribution ...... 25
7 Junction and Network Analysis ...... 31
8 Parking & Service Arrangements ...... 34
9 Conclusions ...... 37
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Keppie Design Site Plan
Appendix B – Traffic Flow Diagrams
Appendix C – TRICS Output
Appendix D – Census Data
Appendix E – Datashine Gravity Model
Appendix F – TRANSYT Link Diagram
Appendix G – Plot 1 Access Junctions 9 Output
Appendix H – Plot 2 Access Junctions 9 Output
Page 3 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
1 Introduction
1.1 Dougall Baillie Associates (DBA) were appointed by Peel L&P Ltd (parent company of Glasgow Harbour Ltd – applicant) to produce a Transportation Assessment (TA) for the proposed erection of a mixed-use development in Kelvinhaugh, Glasgow.
1.2 The development site is located at the Yorkhill Quay in Glasgow’s west end as detailed in Diagram 1.1 below. The site is bordered by the Stobcross Road to the north, the Clydeside Distillery to the east, the River Clyde to the south and the Riverside Museum to the west.
Diagram 1.1 – Site Location Diagram
1.3 The proposed mixed-use development consists of a leisure development in the west of the site, three residential plots in the centre containing 1,100 units and a 200-bedroom hotel to the east; as detailed in the Keppie Design Site Plan drawing included in Appendix A.
1.4 Access to the development would be taken from the existing access to the Riverside Museum and from two separate accesses on Stobcross Road on the site’s northern boundary.
1.5 In keeping with current government policy guidelines this Transportation Assessment assesses the potential for minimising private car usage by public transport. To this end an assessment of existing pedestrian, cycle, and public transport facilities has been carried out. Parking provision and servicing requirements are also assessed.
Page 4 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
1.6 This document takes into account current national, regional, and local legislation and identifies the accessibility of the site by all sustainable transport modes. Travel information has been studied and an assessment of existing transport infrastructure and service provision has been made.
1.7 The report also identifies the impact of vehicular traffic generated by the proposed development on the adjacent road network. The traffic data collection, calculations of traffic generation and local road network assessment have been summarised in this report. More detailed information pertaining to certain aspects of the report are available and can be obtained on request.
1.8 The content of this Transportation Assessment report has been informed by scoping discussions undertaken with Glasgow City Council Transport Officers.
Page 5 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
2 National & Local Policy Framework
Introduction
2.1 The development has been designed to take account of the latest advice from national government, as encapsulated in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), Planning Advice Note 75 and Designing Streets as well as local government reflected by the Glasgow City Development Plan and the Design Guide – New Residential Areas.
Scottish Planning Policy
2.2 The SPP was created in order to focus plan making, planning discussions and development design on the Scottish Governments Purpose. This purpose is the creation of a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth.
Page 6 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
2.3 Sustainable economic growth is described in the SPP Glossary as "Building a dynamic and growing economy that will provide prosperity and opportunities for all, while ensuring that future generations can enjoy a better quality of life too."
2.4 Paragraph 269 notes that "Planning can play an important role in improving connectivity and promoting more sustainable patterns of transport and travel as part of the transition to a low carbon economy."
2.5 Paragraph 270 states that the planning system should support patterns of development which; • optimise the use of existing infrastructure; • provide safe and convenient opportunities for walking and cycling for both active travel and recreation, and facilitate travel by public transport; • enable the integration of transport modes; • facilitate freight movement by rail or water.
2.6 The SPP identifies the key transport issues which should be taken account of with regards to land use. These issues can be found in paragraph 272 and are as follows; • the capacity of the existing transport network • environmental or operational constraints • proposed or committed projects
2.7 Paragraph 279 notes that "Significant travel-generating uses should be sited at location which are well served by public transport, subject to parking restraint policies and are supported by measures to promote the availability of high quality public transport services." The SPP also indicates that Travel Plans may be required for these types of developments.
2.8 Paragraph 287 goes on to emphasise that planning permission should not be granted for significant travel generating uses in locations where; • direct links to local facilities via walking and cycling networks are not or cannot be made available • access to local facilities via public transport would involve walking more than 400m • the transport assessment does not identify satisfactory ways of meeting sustainable transport requirements.
2.9 SPP paragraph 273 gives a hierarchy of personal travel modes to be prioritised in the following order; • walking • cycling • public transport • cars
Page 7 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
2.10 Paragraph 281 notes the SPPs policy on parking standards. National maximum parking standards are set in Annex B of the SPP however the SPP also states that local authorities have the ability to set more or less restrictive standards based on the level of public transport services which serve the development.
Planning Advice Note (PAN) 75
2.11 PAN 75 accompanies the SPP providing advice on good practice. Paragraph 6 notes that ‘one focus of SPP 17 (now superseded by the SPP on Transport) is to achieve better and earlier integration between transport and land use planning at national, regional and local level.'
2.12 It continues that ‘Integration can reduce the need to travel and offer more sustainable travel choices. To achieve sustainable development, the objectives of the SPP must be considered in the context of other planning policy and guidance’.
Designing Streets
2.13 Designing Streets is a policy statement in Scotland for street design which updates and replaces PAN 76 New Residential Streets (now withdrawn).
2.14 Designing Streets identifies a clear distinction between streets and roads through the following definitions: • Roads are thoroughfares whose main function is to facilitate the movement of motor traffic. • Streets have important public realm functions beyond those related to motor traffic. They are typically lined with buildings and public spaces and, whilst facilitation of movement is still a key function, they normally support a range of social, leisure, retail, and commercial functions. 2.15 Based on these definitions it is stated that "all thoroughfares within urban settings and rural boundaries should normally be treated as streets."
2.16 The policies within Designing Streets should be followed in all instances of street design and technical advice is aimed particularly at residential and lightly trafficked streets.
2.17 Streets are identified as having the two key functions of 'place' and 'movement'.
2.18 Designing Streets identifies a "positive sense of place" as encompassing a number of aspects with the most notable of them being: • local distinctiveness; • visual quality; and • potential to encourage social and economic activity.
2.19 In reference to the function of 'movement', Designing Streets states that the "need to cater for motor vehicles is well understood by designers, but the passage of people on foot and cycle has often been neglected. Walking and
Page 8 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
cycling are important modes of travel, offering a more sustainable alternative to the car, making a positive contribution to the overall character of a place, public health, social interaction and to tackling climate change through reductions in carbon emissions".
Glasgow City Development Plan (CDP)
2.20 The key aims of the Glasgow City Development Plan (CDP) are to: • Create and maintain a high quality, healthy place; • Develop a compact city form that supports sustainable development.
2.21 The CDP puts forward measures that are intended to allow the city to make the most of its resources. The CDP sets out a strategy that is intended to deliver on four strategic outcomes: • A vibrant place with a growing economy; • A thriving and sustainable place to live and work; • A connected place to move around and do business in; and • A green place.
2.22 The development site is identified in the CDP as being part of the city’s housing land supply.
Design Guide – New Residential Areas
2.23 Glasgow’s Design Guide for New Residential Areas is Glasgow City Council’s response to the guidance set out in Designing Streets and has been drawn up to assist in the delivery of ‘better designed new residential areas.’
2.24 The Guide is used by Council officials guide their assessment of residential proposals that require planning and/or road construction consent. It is to be used by developers and all professionals involved in the regeneration of the City to understand Glasgow’s expectations for the design of new residential areas. Its principal aims are:
• To promote best practice and improve the process for obtaining planning permission and roads construction consent; • To provide developers/applicants with easy-to-use guidance that explains the steps necessary to secure planning and road construction consent in the most time-effective manner; • To promote the creation of safe and integrated neighbourhoods that offer choices of movements for all users and foster healthy active lifestyles; and • To encourage overall quality and distinctiveness in new developments.
Page 9 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Summary
2.25 This report demonstrates how the development meets the requirements of local and national planning policy for transport with regard to the ability to integrate the development into existing and planned networks for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport.
2.26 Section 4 of this assessment identifies the pedestrian network, cycle network, and public transport provision that are available within the area surrounding the development.
Page 10 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
3 Development Proposals
Development Content
3.1 The content of the proposed mixed-use development is as follows:
Residential Development • Plot 1 – (10,500m2) 500 Private Rental Sector (PRS) homes • Plot 2 – (7,800m2) 400 Co-Living homes • Plot 3 – (9,360m2) 200 Flatted Residential Homes
Leisure Development • Plot 4 – (2,950m2) Leisure Development
Hotel Development • Plot 5 – (3,700m2) 200 Bed Hotel Development
Access Strategy
3.2 As depicted in the layout diagram in Appendix A, the proposed development would be accessed from Pointhouse Place (the existing Riverside Museum access) and from two new priority junctions onto Stobcross Road.
3.3 Pointhouse Place would be extended to provide access to both the Plot 3 residential development and the leisure development. The western priority junction on Stobcross Road would provide access to Plot 1 and the eastern priority junction would provide access to Plot 2 and the Hotel Development.
Pointhouse Place Access
3.4 Pointhouse Place is the south western arm of the signalised Ferry Road Interchange and currently offers access to the Riverside Museum and associated car parks.
3.5 As part of the proposed development, Pointhouse Place would be extended to provide access to the proposed Leisure Development and Plot 3 of the Residential Development.
3.6 Both the Leisure Development and Plot 3 would therefore have direct access to the established vehicular route and through the Ferry Interchange, access to the surrounding road network. Additionally, both developments would connect into the extensive pedestrian and cycle networks available in this area.
Stobcross Road Accesses
3.7 The proposed western access onto Stobcross Road would serve Plot 1 of the Residential Development exclusively and would take the form of a priority junction.
Page 11 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
3.8 The eastern access would also be a priority junction onto Stobcross Road however, this access would serve both Plot 2 of the Residential Development and the Hotel development.
3.9 The potential for the Clyde Fastlink segregated bus corridor to be incorporated along the south side of Stobcross Road has been considered with the development layout taking account of the Fastlink reservation previously provided by GCC.
Page 12 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
4 Sustainable Transport Assessment
4.1 This assessment of Sustainable Transport Accessibility considers in detail the elements of the public transport network that serve the area in which the proposed development is located. Separate sections are included for pedestrian facilities, cycling facilities, bus services, and train services.
4.2 The bus and train sections deal with the routes, quantity, and availability of all relevant services. The current infrastructure for these modes has been examined, along with the potential to maximise access to the site for all relevant travel modes.
4.3 This part of the assessment is based on published service data for bus and train services. This data is often subject to revision and the data used will become outdated in the future, however it is considered to represent a reasonable basis on which to carry out the type of desktop study summarised in this section of the report.
4.4 Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) – Planning for Transport, emphasises that development should be located in areas that are capable of being integrated into effective networks for all forms of transport, including walking cycling and public transport. SPP also clearly identifies a hierarchy of priority that should be given to different transport modes in terms of measures to accommodate their access to a development. This hierarchy is walking, cycling, public transport, and lastly private car.
Pedestrian Facilities 4.5 Within the wider context, the North and South banks of the River Clyde are linked nearby by the Bell’s Bridge, the Millennium Bridge and the Clyde Arc. The core path route for pedestrians and cyclists currently runs along the Northern edge of the site. The realignment of this route onto the riverside would greatly improve connectivity to the wider area.
4.6 The proposed new Govan-Partick Bridge will be located to the South of the Riverside Museum, enhancing connectivity northwards towards Partick, Kelvingrove and the West End.
4.7 The term ‘pedestrian’ covers able-bodied people, disabled people, with or without the use of wheelchairs, the infirm, the elderly, and parents with children in pushchairs or buggies. Due to the range of mobility exhibited by pedestrians, it is important to ensure that the requirements of those with restricted mobility are considered.
4.8 Walking is the main mode of travel for many people especially in urban areas, and in particular in the catchment local to the proposed development. Results from the 2011 Scottish Census indicate that within Glasgow 51% of households do not have access to a car.
4.9 Good pedestrian access to the development site is therefore of primary importance to encourage short local journeys entirely on foot as well as for longer journeys by public transport, which begin and end with a short walk.
Page 13 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
4.10 The most popular pedestrian routes serving the development are anticipated to be those leading to surrounding residential areas, public transport interchanges, schools and local shops.
4.11 The area surrounding the development site is a mixture of residential, commercial and leisure areas with existing footway provision that can easily be extended into the development site. Diagram 4.1 shows the major local amenities within catchment of the development.
Distance on Foot Approx. Time Destinations / Approx. Cycle to Reach on Amenities Time (4m/s) Stobcross Riverside Foot (1.4m/s) Road Access Museum Access Public Transport Accessibility Partick Public Transport 1.0km 1.0km 12 minutes 4 minutes Interchange Educational Establishments Non-Denominational Schools Hillhead Primary School 2.0km 2.3km 24 minutes 8 minutes Hillhead High School 2.1km 2.3km 25 minutes 9 minutes Glasgow Gaelic School 1.6km 2.1km 19 minutes 7 minutes Denominational Schools Notre Dame Primary 1.7km 1.5km 18 minutes 6 minutes School St Thomas Aquinas 3.2km 3.1km 37 minutes 13 minutes Notre Dame High 2.2km 2.0km 24 minutes 8 minutes (girls only) Local Retail & Amenities Lidl Supermarket 1.0km 800m 10 minutes 3 minutes Morrisons Supermarket 1.0km 1.0km 12 minutes 4 minutes West End Retail Park 1.4km 1.4km 17 minutes 6 minutes Glasgow Club: Kelvin 1.4km 1.1km 13 minutes 5 minutes Hall Dumbarton Road (Retail, cafés, leisure, 1.0km – 1.8km 1-0km – 1.7km 12 - 20 minutes 4 - 7 minutes etc.) Table 4.1 – Local amenities near the Development Site
4.12 It is considered that a significant proportion of overall trips to the development will be pedestrian trips, particularly as part of a longer trip, for example to the local train station or bus stops.
4.13 Due to the proximity of Partick Public Transport Interchange and the surrounding commercial areas it is expected that the majority of pedestrian trips from the site would be concentrated to the north.
4.14 However, the proposed footbridge connecting Pointhouse Quay on the north bank of the River Clyde to Water Row on the south bank is expected to be completed by the occupation of the proposed residential development and would offer pedestrian and cyclists easy access to Govan.
Page 14 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
4.15 Therefore, some pedestrian trips from the development are expected to head south via the footbridge to access Govan Public Transport Interchange and the surrounding retail amenities.
4.16 Both Partick and Govan are established commercial and residential areas with extensive pedestrian facilities which would support residents of the proposed development accessing local amenities.
Safe Routes to Schools
4.17 To maximise the number of residents who walk as part of local journeys, it is important to have safe walking routes to nearby schools.
4.18 This is particularly important for Primary Schools which are often located closer to residential developments than Secondary Schools, thereby encouraging walking. Primary School pupils are also more vulnerable road users due to their age and experience.
4.19 Glasgow City Council, like all local authorities in Scotland, have a statutory requirement to provide school transport where the distance to school is over a specified walking distance.
4.20 The current criteria for school transport in Glasgow is: “Glasgow City Council provide transport for children and young people who live more than 1.2 miles (1.93km) or more from their local catchment primary school by the shortest suitable walking route and 2.2 miles (3.54km) from their local catchment secondary school by the shortest suitable walking route.”
4.21 When this criteria is applied to the distances noted in Table 4.1, only pupils attending Hillhead Primary School and some primary school pupils attending Glasgow’s Gaelic School would qualify for free school transport. Free school transport would be provided by one of the following options: • Rail passes which children use on local train services • Underground passes • Dedicated school bus (service solely for pupils) • Taxis or private hire cars • The council's own transport
4.22 Pupils attending Notre Dame Primary school, St Thomas Aquinas, Hillhead High School, Notre Dame High School, and secondary school pupils attending Glasgow’s Gaelic School from the development are within reasonable walking distance and would not satisfy the criteria for free school transport.
4.23 Those attending Notre Dame Primary School and Notre Dame High School would cross the Clydeside Expressway via the pedestrian underpass at the Ferry Road interchange before walking north on Ferry Road, Benalder Street and Dowanhill Street. Primary school pupils would enter Notre Dame Primary and secondary school pupils would continue on Victoria Crescent Road, Victoria Crescent Place, Bowmont Terrace and Bowmont Gardens before reaching Notre Dame High.
Page 15 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
4.24 Pupils walking to Hillhead High School and Glasgow’s Gaelic School would do so via the Clydeside Expressway overpass onto Kelvinhaugh Street which the Gealic School pupils would continue on before turning onto Argyll Street and Berkeley Street, reaching the school entrance. Hillhead High pupils would turn onto Haugh Road via Yorkhill Street before heading north on Kelvin Way, turning into Oakfield Avenue and reaching the school entrance.
4.25 Secondary school pupils attending St Thomas Aquinas would walk to school via Stobcross Road and the Hayburn Interchange, pupils would then head north on Rosevale Street and Crow Road before crossing to Abbey Drive using the signalised crossing facilities and accessing the school via the Westland Drive or Mitre Road entrances.
Cycle Facilities
4.26 National Cycle Route 7 (NCR 7) currently passes directed along Stobcross Road at the site’s northern boundary. See the below image 4.1 from GCC’s Cycling Information webpage for reference.
Image 4.1 – GCC Cycling Information
4.27 As part of the development proposals, the NCR 7 is to be rerouted from Stobcross Road to along the northern bank of the River Clyde.
4.28 The route would cross the River Kelvin via a new pedestrian/cycle bridge proposed as part of the consented Glasgow Harbour Lifestyle Outlet Retail & Leisure development before re-joining the existing route to the west. As indicated in Image 4.1, the existing cycle network provides links to the north, west and east while the introduction of the Govan – Partick bridge will provide direct cycle linkage to the south.
Page 16 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Bus Network
4.29 At present, the closest existing bus stops to the proposed development are located at Partick Public Transport Interchange which, as detailed in Table 4.1, is 1.0km walking distance from the site.
4.30 This is outwith the PAN 75 recommended distance of 400m from a new development however, the interchange offers a significant level of bus services which are detailed in Table 4.2 below.
Weekday Weekday Saturday Sunday Service Route Description Daytime Evening Operator Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Stance 1 Queen Elizabeth Hospitals, Partick Bus Station, Hillhead, Maryhill, Summerston, First 8 Lambhill, Possil, Springburn Rail Station, 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Balornock, Robroyston, Riddrie Library, Glasgow Dennistoun, Parkhead Queen Elizabeth Hospitals, Partick Bus First 16 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Station, Anniesland, Blairdardie Glasgow Glasgow Pavilion, Kelvingrove Art Gallery, 17 Partick Bus Station, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins N/A McGill’s Crookston, Paisley, Elderslie, Johnstone Buchanan Bus Station, Kings Theatre, Partick Bus Station, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, First 77 10 mins 30 mins 15 mins 20 mins Braehead Shopping Centre, Renfrew, Glasgow Glasgow Airport Govan Bus Station, Kinning Park, Shawlands, 60 Mins 60 Mins Battlefield, Rutherglen, Parkhead, 60 Mins (No Service (No Service First 89 Dennistoun, Springburn, Possil, Ruchill, No Service (No Service before before Glasgow Hillhead, Partick Bus Station, Queen Elizabeth before 19:30) Hospital 19:30) 19:30) Stance 2 Govan Bus Station, Kinning Park, Shawlands, 30 Mins Battlefield, Rutherglen, Parkhead, 30 Mins (No Service (No Service First 90 Dennistoun, Springburn, Possil, Ruchill, 30 mins (No Service after 19:03) after Glasgow Hillhead, Partick Bus Station, Queen Elizabeth after 18:57) Hospital 18:30) Stance 3 Queen Elizabeth Hospitals, Partick Bus Station, Hillhead, Maryhill, Summerston, First 8 Lambhill, Possil, Springburn Rail Station, 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Balornock, Robroyston, Riddrie Library, Glasgow Dennistoun, Parkhead
Partick Bus Station, Hillhead, Maryhill, First 8A Lambhill, Possil, Springburn, Balornock, N/A 2 services N/A N/A Robroyston, Riddrie Glasgow Partick Bus Station, Broomhill Broomlea 141 45 mins N/A 45 mins 30 mins McGill’s School, Kelvinside Partick Bus Station, Hyndland, Kelvindale, First M4 60 mins N/A 60 mins N/A Anniesland Glasgow Stance 4
Baillieston, Shettleston, Parkhead, Glasgow Cross, St Enoch’s Centre, Finnieston, Partick First 2 10 mins 30 mins 10 mins 15 mins Bus Station, Scotstoun, Clydebank, Kilbowie, Glasgow Faifley
Page 17 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Stance 5 Drumchapel, Scotstoun, Partick Bus Station, Kings Theatre, Port Eglington, Shawlands, First 3 12 mins 30 mins 15 mins 20 mins Pollokshaws, Silverburn Bus Stand, Crookston, Glasgow Cardonald, Govan Bus Station Blairdardie, Anniesland, Partick Bus Station, First 16 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Govan Queen Elizabeth Hospital Glasgow Stance 6 Drumchapel, Blairdardie, Scotsoun, Partick Avondale 400 10 mins N/A 15 mins N/A Bus Station Coaches Table 4.2 – Bus Services at Partick Public Transport Interchange
Clyde Fastlink
4.31 As noted previously the development incorporate a reservation for the Clyde Fastlink dedicated bus corridor passing parallel with Stobcross Road. It is also noted that Peel L&P Ltd have also made significant financial contributions to the development of Fastlink.
4.32 Upon completion, Clyde Fastlink would provide a bus rapid transit system connecting Glasgow Harbour and the City Centre as well as the Clydefront areas in between. It is expected that Fastlink would be an attractive public transport option for residents of the proposed development, of whom many are expected to work in the City Centre.
Proposed Interim Bus Service Rerouting
4.33 Whilst the Clyde Fastlink would provide the development with a step change in public transport accessibility, it is acknowledged that until its completion public transport accessibility would be below ‘Base Accessibility’ as defined by GCC. In order to address this interim lack of PT accessibility DBA has entered into discussions with First Glasgow to investigate the possibility of rerouting an existing bus service along Stobcross Road and stop at the proposed bus stop locations identified on Diagram 4.2.
4.34 The existing bus services that operate within the vicinity of the site and their current routes were identified and detailed in Diagram 4.2 at the end of this section. Due to their proximity to the proposed development, DBA inquired if one either of the 1a,1b,1c,1d,1e or X4 services, which are routed along the Clydeside Expressway, could be rerouted to Stobcross Road to serve the site.
4.35 As a result of the discussions, First Glasgow have expressed interest in rerouting the X4 service along Stobcross Road upon the construction of the proposed development.
4.36 The X4 currently offers three express services every hour during peak periods from Knightswood to the City Centre and the same number in the opposite direction. The details of this service are noted in Table 4.3 over.
Page 18 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Weekday Weekday Saturday Sunday Service Route Description Daytime Evening Operator Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency
Knightswood, Jordanhill, First X4 20 mins 60 mins 30 mins 30 mins Argyll Street, City Centre Glasgow
Table 4.3 – X4 Bus Service Information
4.37 The rerouting of the X4 service would provide residents of the proposed development with access to a bus service until the Clyde Fastlink scheme is implemented.
Rail Network
4.38 The development site sits within the context of a network of transport hubs within the wider vicinity. These include; Exhibition Centre Station, Partick Interchange, Govan Interchange and Kelvinhall Subway Station.
4.39 Partick Station is the closest railway station to the development. The station is located at the Partick Public Transport Interchange and is accessible via Beith Street.
4.40 The station is approximately 1.0km away (12 minutes’ walk) from the development site accesses on Stobcross Road and the Riverside Museum access.
4.41 Partick station is an important transport hub for Glasgow’s West End and offers several train services to commuters. Services are available to Glasgow Queen Street, Glasgow Central, Edinburgh Waverley, Motherwell, Hamilton, Airdrie and Springburn amongst others.
4.42 Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic and its significant impact on the number of commuters using train services, Scotrail have reduced the number of services operating and have voided their timetables. Therefore, at the time of writing it is difficult to accurately define the frequency of services stopping at Partick Station.
4.43 Despite this, all of the services which stop at Partick Station have been detailed in Table 4.4 below as well as the frequency at which they arrive based on the available information.
Page 19 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Weekday Saturday Sunday Route Description Daytime Operator Frequency Frequency Frequency Helensburgh Central, Craigendoran, Cardross, Dalreoch, Dumbarton Central, Dumbarton East, Dalmuir, Hyndland, Partick, Charing Cross, Glasgow Queen Street, High Street, 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Scotrail Shettleston, Easterhouse, Blairhill, Coatbridge Sunnyside, Coatdyke, Airdrie, Drumgelloch, Bathgate, Livingston North, Uphall, Edinburgh Park, Haymarket, Edinburgh
Dalmuir, Singer, Drumry, Drumchapel, Westerton, Anniesland, Hyndland, Partick, Exhibition Centre, Anderston, 2 services 2 services Glasgow Central, Argyle Street, Bridgeton, Dalmarnock, 60 mins Scotrail Rutherglen, Cambuslang, Newton, Blantyre, Hamilton West, per hour per hour Hamilton Central, Airbles, Motherwell
Dalmuir, Clydebank, Yoker, Garscadden, Scotstounhill, Jordanhill, Hyndland, Partick, Exhibition Centre, Anderston, Glasgow Central, Argyle Street, Bridgeton, Dalmarnock, 30 mins 30 mins 60 mins Scotrail Rutherglen, Cambuslang, Newton, Blantyre, Hamilton West, Hamilton Central, Chatelherault, Merryton, Larkhall
Dalmuir, Clydebank, Yoker, Garscadden, Scotstounhill, Jordanhill, Hyndland, Partick, Exhibition Centre, Anderston, Glasgow Central, Argyle Street, Bridgeton, Dalmarnock, Rutherglen, Cambuslang, Newton, Blantyre, Hamilton West, 60 mins 60 mins N/A Scotrail Hamilton Central, Airbles, Motherwell, Whifflet, Coatbridge Central, Greenfaulds, Cumbernauld
Milngavie, Hillfoot, Bearsden, Westerton, Anniesland, Hyndland, Partick, Charing Cross, Glasgow Queen Street, 30 mins 30 mins N/A Scotrail High Street, Bellgrove, Duke Street, Alexandra Parade, Barnhill, Springburn
Balloch, Alexandria, Renton, Dalreoch, Dumbarton Central, Dumbarton East, Bowling, Kilpatrick, Dalmuir, Singer, Drumry, Drumchapel, Westerton, Anniesland, Hyndland, 30 mins 30 mins N/A Scotrail Partick, Charing Cross, Glasgow Queen Street, High street, Bellgrove, Carntyne, Shettleston, Easterhouse, Blairhill, Coatbridge Sunnyside, Coatdyke, Airdrie
Table 4.4 – Train Services near the Development Site
4.44 As Table 4.4 represents, Partick Station offers multiple train services at a regular frequency which would be a very attractive option to residents of the proposed development both for commuting and leisure.
Glasgow Subway
4.45 Partick Subway Station is part of the Partick Interchange and the closest subway station to the development.
4.46 The Glasgow Subway comprises a double-track circular route that serves a cordon of 15 stations around the City Centre. The Subway connects with the surface rail network at Partick and Buchanan Street stations. There are rail-bus transfer facilities at six of the 15 Underground stations and four stations have Park-and-Ride facilities.
Page 20 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
4.47 The Subway operates between 06:30 and 23:30 Monday to Saturday and 10:00 – 18:00 on a Sunday. The Subway has a service frequency of around 4 – 5 minutes during weekday peak periods reducing to a 12 minute frequency off--peak. During the Saturday peak period (12:00 – 19:30), the Subway operates on a frequency of 5 minutes while on a Sunday a service frequency of 8 minutes operates between 10:00 – 18:00. Data from SPT states that approximately 14 million people use the Subway each year.
Glasgow Subway Network and Public Transport Links
Summary
4.48 In summary, the proposed mixed-use development site would integrate into the existing pedestrian and cycle networks providing good links to existing and proposed amenities.
4.49 Clyde Fastlink would provide a step change in public transport accessibility along the riverside along the wider Glasgow Harbour frontage and Peel L&P Ltd have previously made a significant contribution towards its implementation.
4.50 Discussions have been undertaken with First Glasgow to identify an interim bus service solution for the development prior to the completion of Fastlink, ensuring that the development has access to a bus service within 400m.
4.51 Partick Interchange provides access to regular train services while the subway provides frequent public transport accessibility.
Page 21 Based upon the Ordnance Survey map with the c Copyright of this document is reserved by permission of the Controller of H.M. Dougall Baillie Associates Ltd. Stationery Office. Crown Copyright Reserved. Licence No. AL 100018007 DO NOT scale from this drawing Notes:
Site Location
Public Transport Amenities
Retail Amenities
Leisure Amenities Glasgow University Educational Amenities Places of Worship
Partick Interchange
Proposed New Footbridge
Govan Interchange
Diagram 4.1 Local Amenities Diagram
Scale: Diag. NTS @ A3 Ref: 20033-SK-05 Based upon the Ordnance Survey map with the c Copyright of this document is reserved by permission of the Controller of H.M. Dougall Baillie Associates Ltd. Stationery Office. Crown Copyright Reserved. Licence No. AL 100018007 DO NOT scale from this drawing Notes:
Bus Services - 1(a,b,c,d, e)/X4/100 Partick Proposed rerouting of service Interchange Bus Services - 3/17/77 Bus Services - 2 Bus Services - 3/34(a)/ 49/121 Bus Services - 100 Proposed bus stop locations
Proposed New Footbridge
Site Location
Govan Interchange
Site Diagram 4.2 Location Bus Service Routes and Proposed Bus Stop Locations
Scale: Diag. NTS @ A3 Ref: 20033-SK-01 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
5 Data Collection & Abstraction
5.1 The traffic effects of a new development will depend on the amount of traffic generated by the proposed development and the capacity available on the roads directly affected by development traffic.
5.2 In order to predict the impact of a development on the adjacent road network, it is necessary to consider the operation of the network during the following periods: - • road network traffic peak conditions combined with the predicted levels of development traffic at that time, and • peak development traffic periods combined with the road network conditions at that time.
5.3 Residential developments typically produce maximum trip generation levels during the typical weekday AM and PM commuting peak periods whilst the Hotel and Leisure developments typically generate the maximum number of trips during the Saturday midday peak period. Therefore, this Transportation Assessment has examined the typical weekday AM & PM peak periods and the Saturday midday peak period in order to assess the most onerous combination of existing and development generated traffic levels.
5.4 For a detailed analysis to be carried out four types of information are required- • base traffic flows in the locality, projected to the appropriate future ‘design year’, • any committed development traffic flows within the study road network, • the amount and geographical distribution of traffic generated by the proposed development (along with any committed developments in the area), and • details of the adjacent road network, including geometric layout and existing method of control at relevant junctions.
Base Traffic Flows
5.5 Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic and its significant negative impact on the levels of traffic flow, undertaking new traffic surveys to establish the base traffic flows on the local road network was not possible. Therefore, DBA entered scoping discussions with Glasgow City Council (GCC) to identify suitable base traffic flows for use in this assessment.
5.6 GCC provided 2015 weekday AM and PM traffic data for the local road network including the Ferry Interchange and the Hayburn Interchange whilst DBA have access to existing 2017 data for the weekday PM peak period and the Saturday midday peak period.
5.7 Additionally, the 2019 Beith Street TA produced by SWECO provided weekday AM and PM traffic data however, the data does not cover the entire road network to be assessed.
Page 22 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
5.8 The three sets of traffic data were then compared to assess their similarities. They were found to be closely comparable and no traffic growth could be identified over the four-year period.
5.9 Due the lack of traffic growth identified between 2015 and 2019 and the Covid-19 pandemic preventing traffic growth between 2019 and 2021, it was agreed with GCC that the 2015 AM flows and the 2017 PM and Saturday flows were adopted as the 2020 base flows for this assessment.
5.10 The 2020 AM and PM base traffic flows for the proposed development are demonstrated in Figures 1a, 1b and 1c of the flow diagrams attached in Appendix B of this report.
Design Years
5.11 Traffic flows are commonly projected forward to the year of opening of the development. In this instance the traffic flows have been projected forward to the year 2026, which is considered to represent a robust assessment.
5.12 The traffic flows were again projected using the “Low” growth prediction from the National Road Traffic Forecasts as shown in Table 5.2
Year Index Factor 2020 1.280 1.031 2026 1.320 Table 5.2 - NRTF Low Traffic Growth Rates
5.13 Figures 2a, 2b and 2c of Appendix B indicate the projection of 2020 traffic flows to the design year of 2026 during the weekday morning and evening peak periods and Saturday peak period respectively.
Committed Developments
5.14 The 2017 traffic flows identified previously were undertaken as part of DBA’s 2018 Transport Statement for the Glasgow Harbour Lifestyle Outlet Retail & Leisure development which as a result must be included as a committed development for this assessment. The flows generated by this development are detailed in Figures 4a, 4b and 4c of Appendix B.
5.15 Additionally, within the 2018 TS two other sites were identified as committed developments and as such must also be considered for this assessment. The committed developments identified were the Glasgow Harbour residential development and the Beith Street mixed-use development which DBA produced a TA and TS for in 2011 and 2014. The traffic flows for these committed developments are identified in Figures 3a, 3b and 3c and Figures 5a, 5b and 5c of Appendix B, respectively.
5.16 During scoping discussions, GCC also identified the University of Glasgow Masterplan, Kelvin Hall, Yorkhill Hospital and the SEC Expansion to be considered as committed developments for this assessment.
Page 23 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
5.17 The University of Glasgow Masterplan would result in a reduced level of parking for the university and subsequently a decrease in expected vehicle trips during commuting peak periods. Therefore, to reflect a robust analysis no account of the reduction in traffic projected as a result of the University of Glasgow Masterplan has been taken into account.
5.18 Details for both the Kelvin Hall proposals and the Yorkhill Hospital redevelopment are yet to be confirmed and cannot be considered as committed developments for this assessment.
5.19 The TA produced in support of the SEC Expansion concludes that the development would not have a significant impact during peak periods and as a result no traffic mitigation would be required as a result of the expansion. Given the limited impact during peak periods, the SEC Expansion has not been included as a committed development for this assessment.
Page 24 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
6 Development Generation & Distribution
6.1 The latest planning policy and guidance issued by the Scottish Government stresses the importance of carrying out transportation studies such that full account is taken of the multi-modal nature of the development operation, and that the effects of the scheme on road, public transport, cycling and pedestrian networks are identified.
6.2 Estimation of trip levels generated by the proposed development is based on a combination of engineering experience, local reference information and on surveys undertaken at comparable existing developments related to a common index. In the case of residential developments, the accepted index is the number of dwellings.
6.3 It is generally accepted that the peak periods for trip generation coincide with the weekday morning and evening commuting peak periods on the network.
6.4 To assess the trip generation characteristics of the proposed development, reference was made to trip rates calculated from the TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) database and travel information from local resident areas around the development site extracted from the 2011 Scottish Census.
Multi-Modal Trip Generation
6.5 In line with current guidance, a full multi-modal trip generation assessment of the proposed development has been produced based upon TRICS data (contained in Appendix C for reference) and travel information extracted from the 2011 Scottish Census for the local area surrounding the development site (contained in Appendix D). Whilst the proposed development is located in the G3 8, Finnieston postcode area, it is separated from the main residential areas by the Clydeside Expressway and therefore differs in accessibility to public transport and pedestrian/cycle facilities. The proposed development is most suitably compared to the high-rise residential developments at Glasgow Harbour to the west, both in design and location. Therefore, it was determined that the postcode area most applicable to the proposed development is G11 6, Glasgow Harbour and Partick South.
6.6 The G11 6 postcode area is represented in the (Appendix D) Census extracts and indicatively shown below in Diagram 6.1. Residents outside of these selected areas have been judged to have access to a different set of public transport opportunities, (particularly alternative bus services) and have therefore been excluded.
Page 25 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Diagram 6.1 – Selected Representative 2011 Census Output Area
6.7 Reflecting the extracted census information, Table 6.1 summarises the mode split information for residential trips in the vicinity of the development. In the interest of a robust assessment methodology, those working or studying from home have been excluded from the modal split percentages applied to the development trip generation calculations.
Work or Method of Total Study Public Vehicle Passenger Travel to Work Cyclists Pedestrian Other Person from Transport Trips Trips or Study Trips Home Census Results, Person Trip 149 329 508 40 29 188 16 1259 Types Residential 11.8% 26.1% 40.3% 3.2% 2.3% 14.9% 1.3% 100.0% Modal Split Modal Split (adjusted to account for 29.6% 45.8% 3.6% 2.6% 16.9% 1.4% 100.0% Study or Work from Home having no impact) Table 6.1 – Calculated modal split for proposed residential development
6.8 Residential person trip rates extracted from the TRICS database are summarised in Table 6.2.
Page 26 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
6.9 However, insufficient multi-modal TRICS data is available for the Saturday peak period therefore, a reliable person trip rate could not be extracted from the TRICS database.
6.10 TRICS data collected for previous assessments undertaken by DBA identify the Saturday peak period trip rates, both AM and PM were 51% of the Weekday AM peak departures trip rate. Therefore, for this assessment, it has been assumed that the Saturday Peak period trip rates would be 51% of the weekday AM departure trip rate.
Proposed Person Time Trip Rates (and Generation) Departures Arrivals AM Peak Hour 1.031 (1134 trips) 0.297 (327 trips) PM Peak Hour 0.324 (356 trips) 0.709 (780 trips) Saturday Peak Period 0.526 (578 trips) 0.526 (578 trips)
Table 6.2 – Residential Person Trip Rates & Generation
6.11 Applying the modal split and person trip data included in Tables 6.1 and 6.2 results in the multi-modal trip generation levels shown in Table 6.3.
Total Public Vehicle Passenger Period Routing Cyclists Pedestrian Other Person Transport Trips Trips Trips
Weekday AM OUT 336 519 41 30 192 16 1134 Peak Hr IN 97 150 12 9 55 5 327
Weekday PM OUT 106 163 13 9 60 5 356 Peak Hr IN 231 357 28 20 132 11 780
Saturday OUT 171 265 21 15 98 8 578 Peak Hr IN 171 265 21 15 98 8 578 Table 6.3 – Multi-modal trip generation of proposed residential development
Residential Trip Generation
6.12 The residential developments expected vehicle trip generation levels (and resulting equivalent trip rates), in accordance with the multi-modal calculations, are set out in Table 6.4.
1100 Unit Weekday AM Peak Hr Weekday PM Peak Hr Saturday Peak Hr Residential Development Departures Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Arrivals Vehicle Trips 519 150 163 357 265 265 Rates (vehicle trips 0.472 0.136 0.148 0.324 0.241 0.241 per unit) Table 6.4 – Residential Development Vehicle Trip Generation (and equivalent trip rates)
Page 27 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
6.13 The trip generation has then been split between each of the residential plots based upon the number of units at said plot. As detailed in Figures 9a,9b and 9c of Appendix B, this results in 45% of trips being generated by Plot 1, 37% by Plot 2 and 18% by Plot 3.
6.14 As discussed in detail in Section 8 of this report, Plot 1 and Plot 2 would contain 135 and 110 parking spaces respectively in total which would limit the number of vehicle trips possible from these plots during the peak hours assessed.
6.15 Based upon the trip generation assessment undertaken, both plots would have more vehicles arriving and departing per hour than they have available parking spaces. Therefore, to address this, the departing vehicles in the AM have been limited to ten less than the number of parking spaces available, 125 vehicles at Plot 1 and 110 at Plot 2, and similarly with the arriving vehicles in the PM.
6.16 This results in 93% and 91% of all parked vehicles exiting Plot 1 and Plot 2 respectively during the morning and arriving during the evening peak periods, which is representative of a robust assessment.
6.17 The Saturday trips have been calculated as 51% of the AM departing and the PM arriving movements.
6.18 The residential development trip generation is detailed in Figures 9a,9b and 9c of the flow diagrams.
Leisure Trip Generation
6.19 The form of leisure development is, at this stage, unknown in order to reflect a generally indoor use type trip rate data for Bowling Alley developments was extracted from the RICS database. It is anticipated that this would represent the expected leisure element travel patterns.
6.20 The vehicle trip rates are summarised in Table 6.5 below and the TRICS output is included in Appendix C.
Arrivals Departures Weekday AM Peak Period 0.000 0.000 Weekday PM Peak Period 1.002 1.053 Saturday Peak Period 1.513 1.257 Table 6.5 – Vehicle trip rates per 100m2 GFA (TRICS data)
6.21 Applying the trip rates indicated in Table 6.5 to the proposed 2,950m2 GFA leisure development would result in the vehicle trip generation summarised in Table 6.6 during the weekday morning and evening and Saturday peak hours.
Page 28 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Arrivals Departures Weekday AM Peak Period 0 0 Weekday PM Peak Period 30 31 Saturday Peak Period 45 37 Table 6.6 – Development generated vehicle trips
6.22 The Leisure developments trip generation for the AM, PM and Saturday peak periods are shown in Figures 10a, 10b and 10c of the flow diagrams attached in Appendix B.
Hotel Trip Generation
6.23 Based on surveys undertaken at similar hotel developments vehicle trip rates have been calculated. The vehicle trip rates are summarised in Table 6.7 below and the TRICS output is included in Appendix C. These trip rates were agreed with the council in scoping discussions.
Arrivals Departures Weekday AM Peak Period 0.137 0.165 Weekday PM Peak Period 0.090 0.100 Saturday Peak Period 0.211 0.335 Table 6.7 – Vehicle trip rates per bed (TRICS data)
6.24 Applying the trip rates indicated in Table 6.7 to the proposed 200 bed hotel development would result in the vehicle trip generation summarised in Table 6.8 during the morning and evening peak hours and the Saturday peak hour.
Arrivals Departures Weekday AM Peak Period 27 33 Weekday PM Peak Period 18 20 Saturday Peak Period 42 67 Table 6.8 – Development generated vehicle trips
6.25 The hotel developments trip generation for the AM, PM and Saturday peak periods are shown in Figures 11a, 11b and 11c of the flow diagrams attached in Appendix B.
Vehicle Trip Distribution
6.26 Predicted distribution of the developments vehicle trip generation has been established using census data obtained from the Datashine website for the Scotland Commute dataset (http://scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk)
6.27 Data was extracted for the car driver work trips from the Glasgow Harbour and Partick South area. Trips that had no fixed place of employment were
Page 29 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
removed and the rest of the data analysed. The gravity model developed from this data can be seen in Appendix E.
6.28 A summary of the gravity model calculated origins & destinations for development generated vehicle trips is featured in Table 6.9.
Gravity Model Calculated Routing Origin/Destination on Percentage Study Rd Network Split (to/from development site) A814 Clydeside Expressway 46.8% (east) A814 Clydeside Expressway 30.8% (west) Finnieston Street 7.4% (south) Finnieston Street 5.2% (north) B808 Beith Street 7.0% (east) B808 Beith Street 1.4% (west) Castlebank Street 1.5% (west) Total 100.0% Table 6.9 – Development Generated Vehicle Trip Distribution Summary
6.29 Figure 7 of Appendix C shows the proposed mixed-use developments vehicle trip distribution across the study road network in accordance with the gravity model calculations.
6.30 The total distributed vehicle trip generation for the proposed mixed-use development are detailed in Figures 12a, 12b and 12c of the flow diagrams in Appendix C.
6.31 The distribution of development trips used in this assessment was agreed in discussion with GCC.
Page 30 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
7 Junction and Network Analysis
7.1 Design year traffic flows for the weekday morning and evening peak periods were obtained by the methods described in Sections 5 and 6. Throughout this analysis, these base and projected flows have been used.
7.2 The years identified for analysis were base year 2020, projected year 2026 (representing the potential year of opening). Figures 13a, 13b and 13c in Appendix B illustrate design year traffic flows including committed and proposed development generated traffic.
7.3 Following scoping discussions with Glasgow City Council, the following junctions have been identified for further detailed analysis: • Hayburn Street Interchange; • Ferry Road Interchange; • Glasgow Harbour Lifestyle Outlet Retail & Leisure Development Access.
7.4 In addition to the above, the two priority junctions on Stobcross Road accessing Plots 1 and 2 have been assessed.
7.5 The detailed junction analysis of the Hayburn Street, Ferry Road and Glasgow Harbour Retail road network built to accommodate future development of the Glasgow Harbour Masterplan site was undertaken using the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) computer program TRANSYT / 12. A node and link diagram of the study network is shown in Appendix F.
7.6 The generally accepted performance indicator with regard to traffic capacity at signal-controlled junctions is the Degree of Saturation (DoS). From input data on junction geometry and design year flows, the percentage of available capacity taken up by demand is calculated for each movement or approach. A given movement reaches its capacity when the DoS value reaches 100%; however, a figure of 90% is commonly adopted as a limiting DoS value in the assessment of signal-controlled junctions, to allow for variations in daily traffic demand and site-specific model variations. Lower DoS’s represent less delay and spare capacity, indicating efficient operation.
7.7 It should be noted however, that the level of available capacity within a signalised junction can be varied by the adjustment of cycle and stage times without the need for physical improvements. Changing the junctions staging (varying which signal phases are called together) can also achieve betterment without physical improvements.
7.8 The generally accepted performance indicator with regard to traffic capacity at priority controlled road junctions is the Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC). From input data on junction geometry and design year flows, a ratio of traffic demand to junction capacity is calculated for each movement or approach. A given movement reaches its capacity when the RFC value reaches 1.000, however a figure of 0.850 is commonly adopted as a limiting RFC value for priority control junctions to allow for daily variations. Lower RFC’s represent less delay and spare capacity generally indicating more efficient operation.
Page 31 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Hayburn Street Interchange (Nodes 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9)
7.9 The analysis of the Hayburn Interchange, summarised in Table 7.1, indicates a maximum Degree of Saturation (DoS) of 56% on Link 35, the eastbound Castlebank Street through lane at the Castlebank Street / Hayburn Street junction during the Saturday Peak Period. This DoS is accompanied by a 33- vehicle queue, equating to a queue length of approximately 190m on this three-lane approach.
7.10 The results indicate that the existing road network would continue to operate within capacity in the design year 2026 with committed development traffic and proposed development traffic added.
Ferry Road Interchange (Node 7)
7.11 Pointhouse Place, the southern arm of the Ferry Interchange, provides access to the Riverside Museum as well as Plot 3 of the proposed residential development and the proposed Leisure development.
7.12 The junction analysis of the Ferry Interchange was undertaken with the inclusion of a left turn filter lane on the Castlebank Street eastern approach.
7.13 The analysis of the Ferry Interchange, summarised in Table 7.2, indicates a maximum Degree of Saturation (DoS) of 86% on Link 71, the Pointhouse Place approach during the Saturday Peak Period. This DoS is accompanied by a 11- vehicle queue, equating to a queue length of approximately 64m on this single lane approach.
7.14 The results indicate that the existing road network would continue to operate within capacity in the design year 2026 with committed development traffic and proposed development traffic added.
Glasgow Harbour Lifestyle Outlet Retail & Leisure Development Access (Node 55)
7.15 The analysis of the Glasgow Harbour Lifestyle Outlet Access junction, summarised in Table 7.3, indicates a maximum Degree of Saturation (DoS) of 89% on Links 554 and 555, the Castlebank Street (east) through and left turn arms during the Saturday Peak Period. This DoS is accompanied by a 6-vehicle queue, equating to a queue length of approximately 35m on this double lane approach.
7.16 The results indicate that the existing road network would continue to operate within capacity in the design year 2026 with committed development traffic and proposed development traffic added.
Stobcross Road / Plot 1 Priority Controlled Access
7.17 Analysis of this proposed priority junction was undertaken using the industry standard computer program Junctions 9. The results of this analysis are included in Appendix G.
7.18 The analysis of this junction predicts maximum RFC of 0.297 occurs on the
Page 32 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Stobcross Road (west) approach to the junction during the projected 2026 design year including all committed and development generated traffic.
7.19 These values are within capacity and under the limiting RFC value of 0.850 for new junctions, indicating junction operation within capacity following the completion of the development.
Stobcross Road / Plot 2 Priority Controlled Access
7.20 Analysis of this proposed priority junction was undertaken using the industry standard computer program Junctions 9. The results of this analysis are included in Appendix H.
7.21 The analysis of this junction predicts maximum RFC of 0.259 occurs on the Stobcross Road (west) approach to the junction during the projected 2026 design year including all committed and development generated traffic.
7.22 These values are within capacity and under the limiting RFC value of 0.850 for new junctions, indicating junction operation within capacity following the completion of the development.
Summary
7.23 In summary, as demonstrated by the results discussed above the proposed mixed-use development at the Yorkhill Quay Site would not have a significant negative impact on the operation of the surrounding road network.
Page 33 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
8 Parking & Service Arrangements
8.1 As detailed in the development layout diagram in Appendix A, the proposed development is split into three residential areas (Plots 1,2 and 3), a Hotel development and a leisure development; all of which have their own allocated parking areas.
8.2 To evaluate the level of parking provision required at the development, each of these sections has been assessed separately.
Residential Elements
Plot 1 – 500 Private Rental Sector Residential Units
8.3 Plot 1 is designated as a residential area and would consist of 500 Private Rental Sector (PRS) units. All of these units would remain in the possession of a landlord and rented out to tenants, not to be sold off on the housing market to a private buyer.
8.4 PRS development such as the proposed allow for greater parking control than a typical privately owned development. Parking spaces can be attached to specific units or be included in a lease agreement at the tenant’s request. By doing this, specific units or tenants would have an allocated parking space available only to them.
8.5 Therefore, parking at Plot 1 would be controlled by the landlord and any breaches of the parking restrictions could be dealt with by the landlord and the tenants involved.
8.6 As such, Plot 1 would be provided with 135 parking spaces in total, which would result in slightly over one space per four units and a 25% parking provision.
Plot 2 – 400 Co-Living Residential Units
8.7 Plot 2 would consist of 400 Co-Living residential units which would remain under landlord ownership and leased to tenants, operating similarly to the PRS units in Plot 1. Therefore, parking controls can be enforced by the landlord and breaches of parking regulation can be prevented.
8.8 110 parking spaces would be provided for the 400 units in Plot 2 which would result in slightly over one space per four units and a 25% parking provision.
Plot 3 – 200 Privately Owned Residential Units
8.9 Plot 3 would consist of 200 privately owned residential units, of which 157 would be allocated a single parking space. This would result in over 75% parking provision at Plot 3.
8.10 Physical parking enforcement solutions may be employed at the allocated parking spaces to prevent other residents or visitors parking in a private space.
Page 34 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Car Parking Provision
8.11 As noted, the development proposals incorporate a total of 402 parking spaces for the 1,100 residential units. These parking spaces would be accommodated within the development. Access to these parking spaces would be managed and controlled as described in the Car Park Management Plan noted below.
8.12 The standards for residential car parking in Glasgow are set out in Glasgow City Councils City Development Plan Supplementary Guidance SG11 – Sustainable Transport.
8.13 The standard sets out that residential developments should provide 1 allocated space for each residential unit along with 0.25 unallocated spaces per unit, however SG11 – Sustainable Transport sets out that reductions in these standards can be justified by: • Being located within an area of high public transport accessibility. Chapter 4 of this report details the wide range of existing and proposed sustainable transport options that would be available to development residents. • Dependant on housing type, with flatted accommodation at the lower end of provision; As per the development description, 900 of the 1,100 residential properties would be in the form of rented apartments. • Car availability by household in the surrounding area; The type of development proposed would be promoted within the appropriate low car owning market. All promotional material would promote the sustainable travel options available and identify that many of the units would be rented out on a car free basis.. • Existing pressure on on-street parking in the surrounding area; The streets in the vicinity of the development site are subject to waiting restrictions.
Given the location, type, tenure and accessibility of the development site, the parking provision is considered appropriate.
Car Park Management Plan Access to the residents’ car parking areas will be controlled and for use by residents only. Spaces will be duly designated to tenants as per their tenancy agreements and may be accessed using a fob or similar method. Likewise, those residents not paying for car parking will have agreed not to park vehicles on site as part of their tenancy agreement. Car park terms and conditions will be made clear together with the consequence for breaches of the agreement. One fob (or similar) per rented parking space will be issued to the appropriate residents. The car park barrier will be able to be operated remotely by the individual residential development’s reception.
Page 35 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
8.15 In order to avoid unauthorised parking, appropriate signage will be clearly displayed on all car parking areas, stating that only authorised vehicles are permitted to park.
8.16 The car parking management strategy will be monitored and reviewed on a periodic basis and will be amended or changed as required.
Car Club
8.17 While the development would be well located to be served by no-car based travel, it is acknowledged that travel by car would still be an option that residents may wish to retain. In this regard, provision would be made within the development to accommodate a Car Club parking space.
8.18 The provision of the Car Club facility allows non-car owning residents to have ready and convenient access to a car should they require it.
Hotel Development – 200 Rooms
8.19 Due to the proximity of the Hotel development to Glasgow City Centre and the public transport access to be provided by Fastlink as well as Partick Public Transport Interchange, Hotel guests are not expected to arrive at the hotel via private car.
8.20 The Hotel is expected to operate similarly to city centre hotels and as such would not require significant parking provision for guests.
8.21 There would be 12 parking spaces serving the proposed hotel development.
Leisure Development
8.22 The parking provision at the leisure development has yet to be confirmed and would be agreed upon at a later stage. However, there is a possibility of the leisure development sharing parking spaces with the Riverside Museum.
Servicing 8.23 The layout for the mixed-use development would be designed to comply with the Designing Streets and where appropriate, the Council’s development roads guidelines, and would be sufficient to accommodate normal service and refuse vehicle manoeuvres within the site.
Page 36 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
9 Conclusions
9.1 This assessment considers the transportation implications of the proposed mixed-use development at the Yorkhill Quay site in Kelvinhaugh, Glasgow.
9.2 The proposed development is in accordance with current Government policy as set down in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) with regard to the ability to integrate the development into existing and planned networks for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport.
9.3 The development would be accessible by a range of sustainable transport modes, and pedestrian connections would be made to the existing local footway network on Stobcross Road and the Pointhouse Place access road..
9.4 An extensive offer of bus, train and subway services are available from the Partick Public Transport Interchange to the north west of the development. The Clyde Fastlink would also provide residents with easy access to bus services within 400m walking distance. Prior to the implementation of Fastlink, discussion with First Glasgow has identified that a bus service could be provided on an interim basis along Stobcross Road.
9.5 It is expected that the combination of existing and proposed sustainable transport options would offer an attractive alternative to the private car for residents and visitors of the proposed development.
9.6 The development layout will be designed in accordance with the Designing Streets and Council policies aimed at enhancing the environment for pedestrians and cyclists and mitigate against the private car dominating the development.
9.7 The predicted impact of development traffic generation has been established through detailed analysis of the local road network using industry standard software. This indicated that the road network is predicted to operate within capacity with the addition of development traffic.
9.8 The development’s parking provision has been calculated based upon the site’s location and the available public transport options for residents. Parking controls are to be enforced at the co-living and private rental sector residential units.
9.9 Service vehicles would be accommodated within the final design of the development road layout.
Page 37 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix A
Development Layout Diagram
Copyright, Keppie Design, Ltd © Figured dimensions only are to be taken from this drawing. All dimensions are to be checked on site before any work is put in hand. IF IN DOUBT ASK.
CDM: Hazard Elimination & Risk Reduction has been undertaken and recorded where appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of "The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015" and the associated "Industry Guidance for Designers" N
0 25 50 75m
Scale1:1250
Key:
PPiP Application Redline Boundary Area = c4.64 hectares
Plot Boundary
River Walkway
P01 First Issue AR SM 22.02.21
REVREVREV DESCRIPTION DDDRDRRR''''NNNN CCCHCHHHKKKK''''DDDD DDDADAAATTTTEEEE
GLASGOW 160 West Regent Street Glasgow G2 4RL Tel: 0141 204 0066 www.keppiedesign.co.uk
Client Glasgow Harbour Ltd Peel L&P
Project Yorkhill Quay
Drawing Indicative Masterplan
Project No. P19 -055
Drawing No. Rev P19055 -KEP -XX -XX -DR -A-601003 P01
Status Status Code PLANNING S1
Created: SM Checked: NW Date:20.02.2021 Scale: 1 : 1250 @ A1 Copyright, Keppie Design, Ltd © Figured dimensions only are to be taken from this drawing. All dimensions are to be checked on site before any work is put in hand. IF IN DOUBT ASK.
CDM: Hazard Elimination & Risk Reduction has been undertaken and recorded where appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of "The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015" and the associated "Industry Guidance for Designers" N
0 25 50 75m
Scale1:1250
Key:
PPiP Application Redline Boundary Area = c4.64 hectares
Plot Boundary
River Walkway
L EIS 2 UR ,95 E (a 0m pp 2 ro x.)
P LO 9 T Fla ,3 3 tt 6 ed 0m D R 2 2 ev es 0 el id 0 u op en n m tia its en l (a t pp ro x.)
P LO F 1 T la 0,5 1 D tte 00 e d m ve Re 2 50 lop sid 0 u m en n en tia its t ( l (a PR pp S) ro x.)
P LO 7 T Fla ,8 2 De tt 0 v ed 0m elo R 2 pm es 40 e id 0 u nt en ni (C tia ts o- l (ap Liv pr ing ox ) P04 Plot 3 and Leisure Plot SM NW 22.02.21 .) Boundary updated. P03 Redline Boundary & Plot SM NW 02.10.20 Boundaries updated. P02 Plot 2 Co-Living units SM NW 08.09.20 updated. P01 First Issue SM NW 02.09.20
REVREVREV DESCRIPTION DDDRDRRR''''NNNN CCCHCHHHKKKK''''DDDD DDDADAAATTTTEEEE
HO 2 3 TE 00 ,70 L b 0m ed 2 (a pp ro x.)
GLASGOW 160 West Regent Street Glasgow G2 4RL Tel: 0141 204 0066
www.keppiedesign.co.uk
Client Glasgow Harbour Ltd Peel L&P
Project Yorkhill Quay
Drawing Site Plan Proposed Plot Boundaries
Project No. P19 -055
Drawing No. Rev P19055 -KEP -XX -XX -DR -A-601002 P04
Status Status Code PLANNING S1
Created: LW Checked: SM Date:20.08.20 Scale: 1 : 1250 @ A1 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix B
Traffic Flow Diagrams
Figure 1a 2020 Base Flows Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
895 64 66 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 421
23 639
121 270 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 270 219 8 262 77 77 142 354 352 6 14 816 250 331 346 346 346 566 566 19 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 292 211 426 Castlebank Street 0 67 67 292 64 5 2 1 3
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 1b 2020 Base Flows Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
805 124 128 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 795
51 569
268 241 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 621 303 63 558 72 162 141 187 372 9 38 443 146 247 295 295 295 297 297 8 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 350 371 560 Castlebank Street 6 167 167 350 150 43 22 10 11
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 1c 2020 Base Flows Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
617 139 154 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 530
62 403
203 229 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 364 320 50 314 60 115 205 265 239 71 62 338 146 49 126 126 126 192 192 97 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 209 297 391 Castlebank Street 3 140 140 209 65 79 87 15 72
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 2a 2026 Projected Flows Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
923 66 68 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 434
24 659
125 279 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 278 226 8 270 80 79 147 365 363 6 14 841 258 341 357 357 357 584 584 19 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 301 217 439 Castlebank Street 0 69 69 301 65 5 2 1 3
GH Retail & Leisure Access Low Growth Factor 2020 1.280 1.031 2026 1.320 Riverside Museum Figure 2b 2026 Projected Flows Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
830 128 132 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 820
53 587
276 248 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 640 312 65 575 75 167 145 193 383 9 39 457 151 255 304 304 304 306 306 9 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 361 383 577 Castlebank Street 6 173 173 361 155 44 23 10 11
GH Retail & Leisure Access Low Growth Factor 2020 1.280 1.031 2026 1.320 Riverside Museum Figure 2c 2026 Projected Flows Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
636 143 159 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 546
64 416
210 237 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 376 330 52 324 62 118 212 273 246 73 64 348 150 51 130 130 130 198 198 100 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 215 306 403 Castlebank Street 3 144 144 215 67 82 90 15 74
GH Retail & Leisure Access Low Growth Factor 2020 1.280 1.031 2026 1.320 Riverside Museum Figure 3a Committed Glasgow Harbour Residential Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
24
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 5
24 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 5
5 124 26 162 24 14 14 14 14 138 138 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 34 29 Castlebank Street Stobcross Road 3 3 34 3
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 3b Committed Glasgow Harbour Residential Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
5
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 24
5 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 24
24 26 124 34 5 3 3 3 3 29 29 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 162 138 Castlebank Street Stobcross Road 14 14 162 14
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Development Access Figure 3c Committed Glasgow Harbour Residential Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
17
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 12
17 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 12
12 89 63 115 17 10 10 10 10 98 98 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 83 70 Castlebank Street 7 7 83 7
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Development Access Figure 4a Committed Glasgow Harbour Outlet Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
24 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street
24
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 24
5 24 4 24 5 0 0 0 4 4 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 24 Castlebank Street 0 0 48 48 9
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Development Access Figure 4b Committed Glasgow Harbour Outlet Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
15 5 252 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 19
247
4 15 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 271
208 271 173 206 227 19 19 19 19 14 192 192 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 229 Castlebank Street 23 23 500 500 23 12 419
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 4c Committed Glasgow Harbour Outlet Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
34 9 495 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 37
486
8 34 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 532
437 532 364 404 479 40 40 40 40 28 404 404 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 449 Castlebank Street 45 45 981 981 45 25 883
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 5a Committed Beith Street Development Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
25
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 61
7
18 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 17 44
17
44 44 18 0 0 0 0 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 18 18 Castlebank Street 0 0
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 5b Committed Beith Street Development Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
60
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 42
17
43 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 12 30
12
30 30 43 0 0 0 0 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 43 43 Castlebank Street 0 0
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 5c Committed Beith Street Development Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
50
B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 48
14
36 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 13 34
13
34 34 36 0 0 0 0 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 36 36 Castlebank Street 0 0
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 6a 2026 + Total Committed Developments Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
972 66 92 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 500
24 690
125 320 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 296 299 8 287 85 108 191 537 431 6 14 1003 287 355 371 371 371 0 726 726 19 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 334 235 509 Castlebank Street 0 71 71 48 382 68 0 9 5 2 1 3
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Development Access Figure 6b 2026 + Total Committed Developments Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
910 133 384 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 905
53 851
280 311 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 652 637 65 587 283 462 175 421 757 9 39 490 383 277 326 326 326 14 527 527 9 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 523 426 987 Castlebank Street 6 209 209 500 1023 192 12 419 44 23 10 11
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 6c 2026 + Total Committed Developments Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
737 152 654 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 643
64 916
218 324 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 389 908 52 337 499 663 246 759 750 73 64 464 646 101 180 180 180 28 700 700 100 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 298 342 958 Castlebank Street 3 196 196 981 1279 119 25 883 82 90 15 74
GH Retail & Leisure Access
Riverside Museum Figure 7 Distribution of Development Trip Gen
7.0% 1.4% 1.4% 39.5% 7.0% B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 1.4% 7.0% 7.0%
38.1%
1.4% 7.0% A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 38.1% 30.8% A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 46.4%
30.8% 46.4% 7.1% 32.4% 0 39.6% 32.5% 2.3% 7.9% 12.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 8.6% 39.5% 32.5% Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 1.5% 1.5% 39.1% 40.6% Castlebank Street 38.4% 2.3% 32.3% 7.9% 1.5% 33.2% 5.7% 4.7% 7.4% 8.4% 2.3% 2.3% 39.3% 5.7% 32.3% 4.7%
GH Retail & Leisure Access Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Residential Development Access 18% 45% 37% Figure 9a Proposed Residential Development Trip Generation (including reductions associated with parking limits) Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
22 1 36 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 6
35
4 22 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 43
98 43 11 26 1 31 25 12 27 40 1 1 13 32 25 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 5 125 130 Castlebank Street 105 3 87 8 5 91 5 4 38 44 12 3 109 16 87 13
Riverside Museum Residential Vehicle Trip Generation 1100 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Parking reduced to: Parking reduced to: Trip Rates 0.136 0.472 0.324 0.148 0.241 0.241 Riverside Museum 135 Parking Spaces 110 Parking Spaces Vehicle Trips 150 519 357 163 265 265 & Resi Development Access Plot 1 Plot 2 / Hotel Development 18% 45% 37% Figure 9b Proposed Residential Development Trip Generation (including reductions associated with parking limits) Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
14 3 100 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 18
96
3 14 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 117
60 117 11 88 4 108 87 12 19 25 4 4 13 109 87 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 3 77 80 Castlebank Street 48 3 40 19 3 42 16 13 38 44 12 3 50 7 40 6
Total Residential Vehicle Trip Generation 1100 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Parking reduced to: Parking reduced to: Trip Rates 0.136 0.472 0.324 0.148 0.241 0.241 Riverside Museum 135 Parking Spaces 110 Parking Spaces Vehicle Trips 150 519 357 163 265 265 & Resi Development Access Plot 1 Plot 2 / Hotel Development 18% 45% 37% Figure 9c Proposed Residential Development Trip Generation (including reductions associated with parking limits) Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
15 2 56 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 10
54
3 15 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 66
64 66 11 45 2 55 45 12 20 26 2 2 13 56 45 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 3 82 85 Castlebank Street 54 3 45 11 3 47 8 6 38 44 12 3 56 8 45 6
Total Residential Vehicle Trip Generation 1100 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Parking reduced to: Parking reduced to: Trip Rates 0.136 0.472 0.324 0.148 0.241 0.241 Riverside Museum 135 Parking Spaces 110 Parking Spaces Vehicle Trips 150 519 357 163 265 265 & Resi Development Access Plot 1 Plot 2 / Hotel Development 18% 45% 37% Figure 10a Proposed Leisure Development Trip Generation Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
0 0 0 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 0
0
0 0 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 0 0 Castlebank Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lesiure Element Vehicle Trip Generation 2950 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.000 0.000 1.002 1.053 1.513 1.257 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 0 0 30 31 45 37 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 10b Proposed Leisure Development Trip Generation Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
2 0 12 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 2
11
0 2 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 14
10 14 12 0 4 4 4 0 0 14 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 12 13 Castlebank Street 4 4 0 13 15 4 4
Lesiure Element Vehicle Trip Generation 2950 Units M Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.000 0.000 1.002 1.053 1.513 1.257 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 0 0 30 31 45 37 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 10c Proposed Leisure Development Trip Generation Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
3 1 18 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 3
17
1 3 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 21
11 21 18 1 5 5 5 1 1 21 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 1 14 15 Castlebank Street 6 6 1 15 17 5 6
Lesiure Element Vehicle Trip Generation 2950 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.000 0.000 1.002 1.053 1.513 1.257 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 0 0 30 31 45 37 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 11a Proposed Hotel Development Trip Generation Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
2 0 11 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 2
10
0 2 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 13
10 13 11 0 13 24 4 0 0 24 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 1 13 13 Castlebank Street 15 29 1 13 3 29 4
Hotel Element Vehicle Trip Generation 200 Beds AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.137 0.165 0.090 0.100 0.211 0.335 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 27 33 18 20 42 67 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 11b Proposed Hotel Development Trip Generation Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
2 0 7 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 1
7
0 1 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 8
6 8 7 0 9 16 3 0 0 16 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 0 8 8 Castlebank Street 9 17 0 8 2 17 3
Hotel Element Vehicle Trip Generation 200 Beds AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.137 0.165 0.090 0.100 0.211 0.335 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 27 33 18 20 42 67 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 11c Proposed Hotel Development Trip Generation Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
2 1 17 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 3
16
0 1 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 20
21 20 17 0 20 37 8 0 0 37 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 1 26 27 Castlebank Street 31 59 1 27 5 59 8
Hotel Element Vehicle Trip Generation 200 Beds AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour GH Retail & Leisure Access Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.137 0.165 0.090 0.100 0.211 0.335 Riverside Museum Vehicle Trips 27 33 18 20 42 67 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 12a Total Proposed Development Trip Generation Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
25 2 47 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 8
0 46
5 25 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 0 56
108 0 56 0 0 11 36 1 0 45 61 27 44 0 2 2 13 32 49 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 5 138 143 Castlebank Street 121 120 8 0 5 105 5 7 0 0 38 44 12 3 109 16 116 17
GH Retail & Leisure Access Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 12b Total Proposed Development Trip Generation Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
18 4 118 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 21
0 114
3 17 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 0 139
76 0 139 0 0 22 96 4 0 117 119 23 31 0 5 5 27 109 103 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 4 97 101 Castlebank Street 57 64 23 0 4 50 16 15 0 0 51 58 16 7 50 7 57 8
GH Retail & Leisure Access Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 12c Total Proposed Development Trip Generation Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
19 3 90 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 16
0 87
4 19 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 0 106
96 0 106 0 0 28 62 3 0 75 98 24 39 0 3 3 34 56 81 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 5 122 127 Castlebank Street 85 112 17 0 5 74 8 12 0 0 53 61 16 9 56 8 103 15
GH Retail & Leisure Access Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 13a 2026 + Total Com. Dev's + Total Proposed Dev. Generation Weekday AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
996 67 139 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 509
24 736 21% 79% 76 278 466 130 345 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 296 354 284 8 721 287 193 108 246 537 431 17 51 1005 28% 287 400 432 398 415 0 72% 728 728 32 32 49 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 340 373 652 Castlebank Street 121 191 79 48 388 173 5 7 0 9 280 43 46 13 6 109 16 116 17
639 3 1014 6 614 1014 421 639 GH Retail & Leisure Access Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 13b 2026 + Total Com. Dev's + Total Proposed Dev. Generation Weekday PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
928 137 503 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 926
53 965 35% 65% 273 503 547 283 329 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 652 777 207 65 288 587 359 462 315 421 757 32 135 495 42% 383 394 445 349 358 14 58% 531 531 36 109 103 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 527 523 1088 Castlebank Street 64 274 232 500 1027 241 16 15 12 419 565 95 81 26 18 50 7 57 8
175 914 244 514 321 GH Retail & Leisure Access 564 Riverside Museum & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access Figure 13c 2026 + Total Com. Dev's + Total Proposed Dev. Generation Saturday Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
757 155 745 B808 Beith Street B808 Beith Street 659
64 1003 53% 47% 538 477 512 221 342 A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway
A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway 389 1015 223 52 243 337 595 663 352 759 750 101 126 467 48% 646 176 278 205 220 28 52% 704 704 135 56 81 Stobcross Road Castlebank Street 302 465 1086 Castlebank Street 88 308 213 981 1283 192 8 12 25 883 621 135 151 32 83 56 8 103 15
423 1350 460 950 757 GH Retail & Leisure Access 307 Riverside Museum 1283 643 & Resi Development Access Residential Development Access Leisure Development Access 1350 830 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix C
TRICS Output
TRICS 7.6.4 141219 B19.28 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2019. All rights reserved Thursday 30/01/20 Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-200130-0158 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 03 - RESIDENTIAL Category : A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL VEHICLES
Selected regions and areas: 04 EAST ANGLIA CA CAMBRIDGESHIRE 1 days SF SUFFOLK 1 days 07 YORKSHIRE & NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE NY NORTH YORKSHIRE 3 days SY SOUTH YORKSHIRE 1 days 08 NORTH WEST CH CHESHIRE 2 days GM GREATER MANCHESTER 1 days 10 WALES PS POWYS 1 days 11 SCOTLAND FA FALKIRK 1 days HI HIGHLAND 1 days PK PERTH & KINROSS 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Secondary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Number of dwellings Actual Range: 23 to 73 (units: ) Range Selected by User: 20 to 100 (units: )
Parking Spaces Range: All Surveys Included
Bedrooms per Dwelling Range: All Surveys Included
Percentage of dwellings privately owned: All Surveys Included
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/01/11 to 19/09/19
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Monday 4 days Tuesday 1 days Wednesday 5 days Thursday 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 13 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 9 Edge of Town 4
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Residential Zone 12 No Sub Category 1
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category. TRICS 7.6.4 141219 B19.28 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2019. All rights reserved Thursday 30/01/20 Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: C 3 13 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®.
Population within 1 mile: 1,001 to 5,000 2 days 5,001 to 10,000 3 days 10,001 to 15,000 2 days 15,001 to 20,000 4 days 20,001 to 25,000 1 days 25,001 to 50,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 5,001 to 25,000 2 days 25,001 to 50,000 1 days 50,001 to 75,000 2 days 75,001 to 100,000 4 days 125,001 to 250,000 2 days 250,001 to 500,000 1 days 500,001 or More 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 0.6 to 1.0 1 days 1.1 to 1.5 12 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Travel Plan: Yes 2 days No 11 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 13 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.6.4 141219 B19.28 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2019. All rights reserved Thursday 30/01/20 Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
1 CA-03-A-05 DETACHED HOUSES CAMBRIDGESHIRE EASTFIELD ROAD PETERBOROUGH
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 8 Survey date: MONDAY 17/10/16 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 CH-03-A-09 TERRACED HOUSES CHESHIRE GREYSTOKE ROAD MACCLESFIELD HURDSFIELD Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 4 Survey date: MONDAY 24/11/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 CH-03-A-11 TOWN HOUSES CHESHIRE LONDON ROAD NORTHWICH LEFTWICH Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 4 Survey date: THURSDAY 06/06/19 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 FA-03-A-01 SEMI-DETACHED/TERRACED FALKIRK MANDELA AVENUE FALKIRK
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 3 7 Survey date: THURSDAY 30/05/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 5 GM-03-A-10 DETACHED/SEMI GREATER MANCHESTER BUTT HILL DRIVE MANCHESTER P R E S T W I C H Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 9 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 12/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL 6 HI-03-A-14 SEMI-DETACHED & TERRACED HIGHLAND KING BRUDE ROAD INVERNESS SCORGUIE Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 4 0 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 23/03/16 Survey Type: MANUAL 7 NY-03-A-09 MIXED HOUSING NORTH YORKSHIRE GRAMMAR SCHOOL LANE NORTHALLERTON
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 5 2 Survey date: MONDAY 16/09/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 8 NY-03-A-10 HOUSES AND FLATS NORTH YORKSHIRE BOROUGHBRIDGE ROAD RIPON
Edge of Town No Sub Category Total Number of dwellings: 7 1 Survey date: TUESDAY 17/09/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 9 NY-03-A-11 PRIVATE HOUSING NORTH YORKSHIRE HORSEFAIR BOROUGHBRIDGE
Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 3 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 18/09/13 Survey Type: MANUAL TRICS 7.6.4 141219 B19.28 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2019. All rights reserved Thursday 30/01/20 Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters (Cont.)
10 PK-03-A-01 DETAC. & BUNGALOWS PERTH & KINROSS TULLYLUMB TERRACE PERTH CORNHILL Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 3 6 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 11/05/11 Survey Type: MANUAL 11 PS-03-A-02 DETACHED/SEMI-DETACHED POWYS GUNROG ROAD WELSHPOOL
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 2 8 Survey date: MONDAY 11/05/15 Survey Type: MANUAL 12 SF-03-A-07 MIXED HOUSES SUFFOLK FOXHALL ROAD IPSWICH
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 7 3 Survey date: THURSDAY 09/05/19 Survey Type: MANUAL 13 SY-03-A-01 SEMI DETACHED HOUSES SOUTH YORKSHIRE A19 BENTLEY ROAD DONCASTER BENTLEY RISE Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 5 4 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 18/09/13 Survey Type: MANUAL
This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count.
MANUALLY DESELECTED SITES
Site Ref Reason for Deselection CH-03-A-10 Excluded for excessively low rates DH-03-A-01 Excluded for excessively low rates LE-03-A-02 Excluded for excessively low rates LN-03-A-03 Excluded for excessively low rates NF-03-A-01 Excluded for excessively low rates NF-03-A-02 Excluded for excessively low rates NF-03-A-04 Excluded for excessively low rates NF-03-A-05 Excluded for excessively low rates NY-03-A-08 Excluded for excessively low rates SH-03-A-05 Excluded for excessively low rates WM-03-A-04 Excluded for excessively low rates TRICS 7.6.4 141219 B19.28 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2019. All rights reserved Thursday 30/01/20 Page 6 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL TOTAL PEOPLE Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 07:00 - 08:00 13 40 0.125 13 40 0.489 13 40 0.614 08:00 - 09:00 13 40 0.297 13 40 1.031 13 40 1.328 09:00 - 10:00 13 40 0.243 13 40 0.318 13 40 0.561 10:00 - 11:00 13 40 0.204 13 40 0.262 13 40 0.466 11:00 - 12:00 13 40 0.204 13 40 0.198 13 40 0.402 12:00 - 13:00 13 40 0.256 13 40 0.235 13 40 0.491 13:00 - 14:00 13 40 0.245 13 40 0.270 13 40 0.515 14:00 - 15:00 13 40 0.277 13 40 0.322 13 40 0.599 15:00 - 16:00 13 40 0.603 13 40 0.366 13 40 0.969 16:00 - 17:00 13 40 0.630 13 40 0.314 13 40 0.944 17:00 - 18:00 13 40 0.709 13 40 0.324 13 40 1.033 18:00 - 19:00 13 40 0.449 13 40 0.214 13 40 0.663 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 4.242 4.343 8.585
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-200901-0948 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 07 - LEISURE Category : B - BOWLING ALLEYS VEHICLES
Selected regions and areas: 02 SOUTH EAST EX ESSEX 1 days 04 EAST ANGLIA CA CAMBRIDGESHIRE 1 days 05 EAST MIDLANDS LN LINCOLNSHIRE 1 days 09 NORTH TW TYNE & WEAR 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Primary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Gross floor area Actual Range: 2000 to 3318 (units: sqm) Range Selected by User: 913 to 5060 (units: sqm)
Parking Spaces Range: All Surveys Included
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/01/12 to 20/10/18
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Saturday 4 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 4 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 3 Edge of Town 1
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Residential Zone 1 Retail Zone 1 Out of Town 1 No Sub Category 1
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category.
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: D 2 4 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection (Cont.):
Population within 1 mile: 1,001 to 5,000 1 days 5,001 to 10,000 1 days 20,001 to 25,000 1 days 25,001 to 50,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 25,001 to 50,000 1 days 125,001 to 250,000 2 days 250,001 to 500,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 0.5 or Less 1 days 1.1 to 1.5 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Travel Plan: No 4 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 4 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
1 CA-07-B-02 BOWLING CAMBRIDGESHIRE HUNTINGDON ROAD ST NEOTS
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 2 0 0 0 sqm Survey date: SATURDAY 23/06/18 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 EX-07-B-01 TENPIN ESSEX COWDRAY AVENUE COLCHESTER
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) No Sub Category Total Gross floor area: 2 2 0 0 sqm Survey date: SATURDAY 19/05/18 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 LN-07-B-01 BOWLING LINCOLNSHIRE WASHINGBOROUGH ROAD LINCOLN CANWICK HILL Edge of Town Out of Town Total Gross floor area: 2 2 6 4 sqm Survey date: SATURDAY 07/10/17 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 TW-07-B-01 AMF BOWLING TYNE & WEAR WASHINGTON HIGHWAY WASHINGTON
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Retail Zone Total Gross floor area: 3 3 1 8 sqm Survey date: SATURDAY 20/10/18 Survey Type: MANUAL
This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 07 - LEISURE/B - BOWLING ALLEYS VEHICLES Calculation factor: 100 sqm BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip Time Range Days GFA Rate Days GFA Rate Days GFA Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 07:00 - 08:00 1 2264 0.044 1 2264 0.000 1 2264 0.044 08:00 - 09:00 1 2264 0.398 1 2264 0.088 1 2264 0.486 09:00 - 10:00 2 2232 1.837 2 2232 1.277 2 2232 3.114 10:00 - 11:00 4 2446 1.206 4 2446 0.797 4 2446 2.003 11:00 - 12:00 4 2446 1.084 4 2446 1.022 4 2446 2.106 12:00 - 13:00 4 2446 1.513 4 2446 1.257 4 2446 2.770 13:00 - 14:00 4 2446 1.319 4 2446 1.165 4 2446 2.484 14:00 - 15:00 4 2446 1.288 4 2446 1.309 4 2446 2.597 15:00 - 16:00 4 2446 0.981 4 2446 1.196 4 2446 2.177 16:00 - 17:00 4 2446 0.859 4 2446 0.971 4 2446 1.830 17:00 - 18:00 4 2446 1.002 4 2446 1.053 4 2446 2.055 18:00 - 19:00 4 2446 1.217 4 2446 0.910 4 2446 2.127 19:00 - 20:00 4 2446 1.094 4 2446 0.797 4 2446 1.891 20:00 - 21:00 4 2446 0.910 4 2446 0.624 4 2446 1.534 21:00 - 22:00 4 2446 0.552 4 2446 1.094 4 2446 1.646 22:00 - 23:00 4 2446 0.368 4 2446 1.084 4 2446 1.452 23:00 - 24:00 4 2446 0.266 4 2446 0.583 4 2446 0.849 Total Rates: 1 5.938 1 5.227 3 1.165
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
Parameter summary
Trip rate parameter range selected: 2000 - 3318 (units: sqm) Survey date date range: 01/01/12 - 20/10/18 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 0 Number of Saturdays: 4 Number of Sundays: 0 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of the standard filtering procedure are displayed. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkhill Quay Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-200901-0923 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK Category : A - HOTELS VEHICLES
Selected regions and areas: 05 EAST MIDLANDS LE LEICESTERSHIRE 1 days NT NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 1 days 07 YORKSHIRE & NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE NY NORTH YORKSHIRE 2 days WY WEST YORKSHIRE 1 days 08 NORTH WEST GM GREATER MANCHESTER 1 days 09 NORTH TV TEES VALLEY 1 days TW TYNE & WEAR 1 days 10 WALES CF CARDIFF 2 days SW SWANSEA 1 days 11 SCOTLAND AG ANGUS 1 days HI HIGHLAND 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Primary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Number of bedrooms Actual Range: 4 to 227 (units: ) Range Selected by User: 4 to 380 (units: )
Parking Spaces Range: All Surveys Included
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/01/12 to 07/10/19
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Monday 6 days Tuesday 3 days Wednesday 1 days Thursday 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 13 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Town Centre 5 Edge of Town Centre 5 Edge of Town 3
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Commercial Zone 2 Development Zone 2 Residential Zone 3 Built-Up Zone 6
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkhill Quay Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: C 1 13 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®.
Population within 1 mile: 5,001 to 10,000 2 days 10,001 to 15,000 1 days 15,001 to 20,000 2 days 25,001 to 50,000 7 days 50,001 to 100,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 25,001 to 50,000 1 days 75,001 to 100,000 2 days 100,001 to 125,000 1 days 125,001 to 250,000 2 days 250,001 to 500,000 4 days 500,001 or More 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 0.6 to 1.0 7 days 1.1 to 1.5 6 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Travel Plan: No 13 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 13 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkhill Quay Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
1 AG-06-A-01 BOUTIQUE B&B ANGUS CLIFFBURN ROAD ARBROATH HAYSHEAD Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 4 Survey date: TUESDAY 22/05/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 CF-06-A-03 HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS CARDIFF LONGUEIL CLOSE CARDIFF
Edge of Town Centre Residential Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 8 7 Survey date: MONDAY 16/07/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 CF-06-A-04 TRAVELODGE CARDIFF THE FRIARY CARDIFF
Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 9 6 Survey date: MONDAY 16/07/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 GM-06-A-08 IBIS GREATER MANCHESTER PORTLAND STREET MANCHESTER
Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 1 2 7 Survey date: MONDAY 26/09/16 Survey Type: MANUAL 5 HI-06-A-05 BEST WESTERN HIGHLAND NESS WALK INVERNESS
Edge of Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 8 9 Survey date: THURSDAY 19/04/18 Survey Type: MANUAL 6 LE-06-A-01 MARRIOTT LEICESTERSHIRE SMITH WAY LEICESTER ENDERBY Edge of Town Commercial Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 2 2 7 Survey date: THURSDAY 12/07/18 Survey Type: MANUAL 7 NT-06-A-02 PREMIER INN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE LONDON ROAD NOTTINGHAM
Edge of Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 8 7 Survey date: MONDAY 24/06/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 8 NY-06-A-01 ASCEND HOTEL NORTH YORKSHIRE PARK PARADE HARROGATE
Edge of Town Centre Residential Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 1 0 0 Survey date: TUESDAY 23/10/18 Survey Type: MANUAL 9 NY-06-A-02 BESPOKE HOTEL NORTH YORKSHIRE CROWN PLACE HARROGATE
Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 1 1 4 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 13/03/19 Survey Type: MANUAL TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkhill Quay Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters (Cont.)
10 SW-06-A-01 IBIS SWANSEA FABIAN WAY SWANSEA PORT TENNANT Edge of Town Development Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 9 9 Survey date: MONDAY 07/10/19 Survey Type: MANUAL 11 TV-06-A-04 THISTLE TEES VALLEY FRY STREET MIDDLESBROUGH
Town Centre Commercial Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 1 3 2 Survey date: THURSDAY 03/10/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 12 TW-06-A-03 HOTEL TYNE & WEAR SANDHILL NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE QUAYSIDE Town Centre Built-Up Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 2 4 Survey date: TUESDAY 14/06/16 Survey Type: MANUAL 13 WY-06-A-03 TRAVELODGE WEST YORKSHIRE DEAN CLOUGH HALIFAX
Edge of Town Centre Development Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 5 1 Survey date: MONDAY 22/10/18 Survey Type: MANUAL
This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkhill Quay Page 5 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK/A - HOTELS VEHICLES Calculation factor: 1 BEDRMS BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip Time Range Days BEDRMS Rate Days BEDRMS Rate Days BEDRMS Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 07:00 - 08:00 13 95 0.067 13 95 0.112 13 95 0.179 08:00 - 09:00 13 95 0.137 13 95 0.165 13 95 0.302 09:00 - 10:00 13 95 0.150 13 95 0.138 13 95 0.288 10:00 - 11:00 13 95 0.119 13 95 0.109 13 95 0.228 11:00 - 12:00 13 95 0.055 13 95 0.088 13 95 0.143 12:00 - 13:00 13 95 0.100 13 95 0.063 13 95 0.163 13:00 - 14:00 13 95 0.096 13 95 0.072 13 95 0.168 14:00 - 15:00 13 95 0.076 13 95 0.095 13 95 0.171 15:00 - 16:00 13 95 0.103 13 95 0.085 13 95 0.188 16:00 - 17:00 13 95 0.091 13 95 0.110 13 95 0.201 17:00 - 18:00 13 95 0.090 13 95 0.100 13 95 0.190 18:00 - 19:00 13 95 0.089 13 95 0.091 13 95 0.180 19:00 - 20:00 13 95 0.070 13 95 0.061 13 95 0.131 20:00 - 21:00 13 95 0.053 13 95 0.036 13 95 0.089 21:00 - 22:00 13 95 0.039 13 95 0.026 13 95 0.065 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 1.335 1.351 2.686
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
Parameter summary
Trip rate parameter range selected: 4 - 227 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/01/12 - 07/10/19 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 13 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of the standard filtering procedure are displayed. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-200901-0912 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK Category : A - HOTELS VEHICLES
Selected regions and areas: 02 SOUTH EAST HC HAMPSHIRE 2 days KC KENT 1 days 03 SOUTH WEST DC DORSET 1 days 05 EAST MIDLANDS DS DERBYSHIRE 1 days 06 WEST MIDLANDS WM WEST MIDLANDS 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Primary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Number of bedrooms Actual Range: 15 to 126 (units: ) Range Selected by User: 4 to 380 (units: )
Parking Spaces Range: All Surveys Included
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/09/00 to 01/09/20
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Saturday 6 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 6 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 1 Edge of Town 3 Free Standing (PPS6 Out of Town) 2
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Residential Zone 1 Out of Town 1 No Sub Category 4
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: C 1 6 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®.
Population within 1 mile: 1,000 or Less 1 days 1,001 to 5,000 2 days 5,001 to 10,000 1 days 15,001 to 20,000 1 days 25,001 to 50,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 5,001 to 25,000 1 days 100,001 to 125,000 1 days 125,001 to 250,000 1 days 250,001 to 500,000 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 0.5 or Less 1 days 0.6 to 1.0 2 days 1.1 to 1.5 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Travel Plan: Not Known 3 days No 3 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 6 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
1 DC-06-A-03 HOTEL DORSET EAST STOKE NEAR WAREHAM BINNEGAR Free Standing (PPS6 Out of Town) No Sub Category Total Number of bedrooms: 1 5 Survey date: SATURDAY 21/09/02 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 DS-06-A-03 MENZIES HOTEL DERBYSHIRE ETWALL ROAD DERBY MICKLEOVER Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of bedrooms: 9 9 Survey date: SATURDAY 25/07/15 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 HC-06-A-05 TRAVEL INN HAMPSHIRE M27 WESTBOUND SOUTHAMPTON ROWNHAMS Edge of Town No Sub Category Total Number of bedrooms: 3 9 Survey date: SATURDAY 20/07/02 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 HC-06-A-06 HOTEL HAMPSHIRE GRANGE ROAD SOUTHAMPTON HEDGE END Edge of Town No Sub Category Total Number of bedrooms: 5 6 Survey date: SATURDAY 07/12/02 Survey Type: MANUAL 5 KC-06-A-01 RAMADA HOTEL KENT ASHFORD ROAD NEAR MAIDSTONE HOLLINGBOURNE Free Standing (PPS6 Out of Town) Out of Town Total Number of bedrooms: 1 2 6 Survey date: SATURDAY 15/06/02 Survey Type: MANUAL 6 WM-06-A-02 HOTEL WEST MIDLANDS ST NICHOLAS STREET COVENTRY DRAPER'S FIELD Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) No Sub Category Total Number of bedrooms: 2 6 Survey date: SATURDAY 18/02/06 Survey Type: MANUAL
This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Tuesday 01/09/20 20033 - Yorkill Quay Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 06 - HOTEL, FOOD & DRINK/A - HOTELS VEHICLES Calculation factor: 1 BEDRMS BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip Time Range Days BEDRMS Rate Days BEDRMS Rate Days BEDRMS Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 1 126 0.111 1 126 0.048 1 126 0.159 07:00 - 08:00 6 60 0.136 6 60 0.147 6 60 0.283 08:00 - 09:00 6 60 0.183 6 60 0.258 6 60 0.441 09:00 - 10:00 6 60 0.211 6 60 0.227 6 60 0.438 10:00 - 11:00 6 60 0.197 6 60 0.244 6 60 0.441 11:00 - 12:00 6 60 0.211 6 60 0.335 6 60 0.546 12:00 - 13:00 6 60 0.180 6 60 0.161 6 60 0.341 13:00 - 14:00 6 60 0.247 6 60 0.133 6 60 0.380 14:00 - 15:00 6 60 0.186 6 60 0.197 6 60 0.383 15:00 - 16:00 6 60 0.186 6 60 0.169 6 60 0.355 16:00 - 17:00 6 60 0.258 6 60 0.222 6 60 0.480 17:00 - 18:00 6 60 0.299 6 60 0.158 6 60 0.457 18:00 - 19:00 6 60 0.316 6 60 0.194 6 60 0.510 19:00 - 20:00 3 84 0.287 3 84 0.195 3 84 0.482 20:00 - 21:00 3 84 0.199 3 84 0.215 3 84 0.414 21:00 - 22:00 2 113 0.107 2 113 0.120 2 113 0.227 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 3.314 3.023 6.337
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
Parameter summary
Trip rate parameter range selected: 15 - 126 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/09/00 - 01/09/20 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 0 Number of Saturdays: 6 Number of Sundays: 0 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of the standard filtering procedure are displayed. Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix D
Census Data
C11 Scotland's Census 2011 - National Records of Scotland Table QS702SC - Method of travel to work or study (1) All people aged 4 and over who are studying or aged 16 to 74 in employment in the week before the census 2011OutputArea by Transport to place of work or study by Term-time Address (Indicator) and In education or employment Counting: Person
Filters: Default SummationPerson Term-time Address Resident(Indicator) In education or employmentIn education or employment - Part time students
Work or study Underground, Bus, minibus or Driving a car or Passenger in a Motorcycle, Transport to place of work or study All people Train Taxi or minicab Bicycle On foot Other mainly at or from metro, light rail or coach van car or van scooter or moped
2011OutputArea S00112416 78 4 11 10 8 0 26 2 0 0 16 1 S00112419 78 17 6 8 3 0 31 5 0 3 5 0 S00112420 49 7 3 4 4 0 23 1 0 1 6 0 S00112421 121 18 11 7 9 1 54 1 0 5 14 1 S00112422 56 9 3 4 5 0 24 0 0 1 9 1 S00112423 89 2 8 10 5 0 46 3 0 3 12 0 S00112424 45 5 6 3 1 0 22 2 0 0 6 0 S00112425 60 7 4 3 3 0 22 2 1 1 15 2 S00112426 76 7 7 7 4 1 34 4 0 0 10 2 S00112427 78 8 6 10 4 0 37 2 0 1 10 0 S00112428 69 9 14 6 5 0 24 1 0 0 8 2 S00112429 64 9 8 8 4 0 21 1 0 1 11 1 S00112430 56 6 6 6 4 1 14 0 0 2 17 0 S00112431 63 12 6 7 3 0 24 2 0 1 7 1 S00112432 74 7 7 11 5 1 22 5 0 2 12 2 S00112433 94 15 7 8 6 0 33 6 0 7 10 2 S00112435 109 7 11 14 6 2 44 3 0 1 20 1
(1) Excludes some 4 and 5 year olds (a total of 11,867 in Scotland) who were reported as being in full-time education but for whom no information on their place of study or method of travel to study was provided. Crown copyright 2013 For further information on variables, see www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/variables In order to protect against disclosure of personal information, some records have been swapped between different geographic areas. Some cell values will be affected, particularly small values at the most detailed geographies. Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix E
Datashine Gravity Model
Gravity Model & Residential Vehicle Trip Distribution Calculations (Outbound Traffic) Data extracted from DataShine: Scotland Commute http://scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway Finnieston St Finnieston St B808 Beith St B808 Beith St Castlebank St Origin Destination Trips Percent (east) (west) (south) (north) (east) (west) (west) City Centre South 30 5.8% 5.80% City Centre East 30 5.8% 5.80% Drumoyne and Shieldhall 30 5.8% 5.80% Kelvinside and Jordanhill 28 5.4% 5.42% Ibrox East and Cessnock 27 5.2% 5.22% Finnieston and Kelvinhaugh 27 5.2% 5.22% Paisley North 23 4.4% 2.22% 2.22% Kelvingrove and University 21 4.1% 4.06% IZ02 18 3.5% 3.48% Scotstoun South and West 17 3.3% 3.29% Anderston 17 3.3% 3.29% Paisley Central 15 2.9% 1.45% 1.45% Hillhead 15 2.9% 2.90% Laurieston and Tradeston 14 2.7% 2.71% Paisley South 14 2.7% 1.35% 1.35% Renfrewshire Rural North and Langbank 14 2.7% 1.35% 1.35% Govan and Linthouse 13 2.5% 2.51% City Centre West 12 2.3% 2.32% Woodside 12 2.3% 2.32% England 12 2.3% 2.32% Ibrox 11 2.1% 2.13% Renfrew North 10 1.9% 0.97% 0.97% Fallside 9 1.7% 1.74% Woodlands 9 1.7% 1.74% Whiteinch 8 1.5% 1.55% Crosshouse, Gatehead and Kilmaurs Rural 8 1.5% 1.55% Garelochhead 8 1.5% 1.55% Glasgow Harbour and Partick South Partick South and Harbour Glasgow Glasgow Harbour and Partick South 7 1.4% 1.35% Anniesland East 7 1.4% 1.35% Craigneuk Wishaw 7 1.4% 1.35% Gorbals and Hutchesontown 7 1.4% 1.35% Bellsquarry, Adambrae and Kirkton 7 1.4% 1.35% Roystonhill, Blochairn, and Provanmill 6 1.2% 1.16% Shettleston South 6 1.2% 1.16% Parkhead West and Barrowfield 6 1.2% 1.16% Ratho, Ingliston and Gogar 6 1.2% 1.16% Hamilton Centre and Low Parks 6 1.2% 1.16% Totals 517 100% 46.8% 30.8% 7.4% 5.2% 7.0% 1.4% 1.5% Gravity Model & Residential Vehicle Trip Distribution Calculations (Inbound Traffic) Data extracted from DataShine: Scotland Commute http://scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk A814 Clydeside Expressway A814 Clydeside Expressway Finnieston St Finnieston St B808 Beith St B808 Beith St Castlebank St Origin Destination Trips Percent (east) (west) (south) (north) (east) (west) (west) City Centre South 30 5.8% 5.80% City Centre East 30 5.8% 5.80% Drumoyne and Shieldhall 30 5.8% 5.80% Kelvinside and Jordanhill 28 5.4% 5.42% Ibrox East and Cessnock 27 5.2% 5.22% Finnieston and Kelvinhaugh 27 5.2% 5.22% Paisley North 23 4.4% 4.45% Kelvingrove and University 21 4.1% 4.06% IZ02 18 3.5% 3.48% Scotstoun South and West 17 3.3% 3.29% Anderston 17 3.3% 3.29% Paisley Central 15 2.9% 2.90% Hillhead 15 2.9% 2.90% Laurieston and Tradeston 14 2.7% 2.71% Paisley South 14 2.7% 2.71% Renfrewshire Rural North and Langbank 14 2.7% 2.71% Govan and Linthouse 13 2.5% 2.51% City Centre West 12 2.3% 2.32% Woodside 12 2.3% 2.32% England 12 2.3% 2.32% Ibrox 11 2.1% 2.13% Renfrew North 10 1.9% 1.93% Fallside 9 1.7% 1.74% Woodlands 9 1.7% 1.74% Whiteinch 8 1.5% 1.55% Crosshouse, Gatehead and Kilmaurs Rural 8 1.5% 1.55% Garelochhead 8 1.5% 1.55% Glasgow Harbour and Partick South Partick South and Harbour Glasgow Glasgow Harbour and Partick South 7 1.4% 1.35% Anniesland East 7 1.4% 1.35% Craigneuk Wishaw 7 1.4% 1.35% Gorbals and Hutchesontown 7 1.4% 1.35% Bellsquarry, Adambrae and Kirkton 7 1.4% 1.35% Roystonhill, Blochairn, and Provanmill 6 1.2% 1.16% Shettleston South 6 1.2% 1.16% Parkhead West and Barrowfield 6 1.2% 1.16% Ratho, Ingliston and Gogar 6 1.2% 1.16% Hamilton Centre and Low Parks 6 1.2% 1.16% Totals 517 100% 39.5% 38.1% 7.4% 5.2% 7.0% 1.4% 1.5% Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix F
TRANSYT Link Diagram
c Copyright of this document is reserved by Dougall Baillie Associates Ltd. DO NOT scale from this drawing
Notes:
Rev. Revision details: By: Checked: Date: Date:
Client: PEEL L&P LTD
Project: GLASGOW WATERS (YORKHILL QUAY)
Drawing Title: HAYBURN INTERCHANGE, FERRY INTERCHANGE & LIFESTYLE OUTLET ACCESS TRANSYT LINK DIAGRAM
Drawn: Checked: DW SH
Date: Date: 05/03/21 05/03/21
Scale: Dwg. NTS @A3 No: 20033-TRA-01 Dwg Status: Information Print: B/W Dougall Baillie Associates 3 Glenfield Road, Kelvin East Kilbride G75 0RA t: 01355 266480 f: 01355 221991 e: [email protected] w: www.dougallbaillie.com civil. structural. transportation. water management.
?
BasedpermissionStationeryLicenceAL 100018007 upon No. ofOffice. the the Ordnance Controller Crown CopyrightSurvey of H.M. map Reserved. with the Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix G
Plot 1 Access Junctions 9 Output
Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Junctions 9 PICADY 9 - Priority Intersection Module Version: 9.5.1.7462 © Copyright TRL Limited, 2019 For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL: +44 (0)1344 379777 [email protected] www.trlsoftware.co.uk The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution
Filename: 20033 - Plot 1 Access Junction.j9 Path: W:\20000s\20033 - Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay)\Traffic\Picady Report generation date: 12/03/2021 14:59:39
»2026 + Com + Gen, AM »2026 + Com + Gen, PM »2026 + Com + Gen, SAT
Summary of junction performance
AM PM SAT Network Network Network Set Queue Delay Set Queue Delay Set Queue Delay RFC LOS Residual RFC LOS Residual RFC LOS Residual ID (PCU) (s) ID (PCU) (s) ID (PCU) (s) Capacity Capacity Capacity 2026 + Com + Gen 148 % 81 % 185 % Stream B-AC 0.3 8.94 0.24 A 0.1 8.14 0.11 A 0.2 8.21 0.13 A
D1 D2 D3 [Stream B- [Stream C- [Stream C- Stream C-AB 0.2 5.11 0.08 A AC] 0.8 6.30 0.30 A AB] 0.3 6.01 0.14 A AB]
Values shown are the highest values encountered over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle. Network Residual Capacity indicates the amount by which network flow could be increased before a user-definable threshold (see Analysis Options) is met.
File summary
File Description
Title Plot 1 Access Junction Location Yorkhill Quay Site number Date 12/03/2021 Version Status (new file) Identifier Client Peel Ports Jobnumber 20033 Enumerator DBA\daniel.winnie Description
Units Distance units Speed units Traffic units input Traffic units results Flow units Average delay units Total delay units Rate of delay units m kph PCU PCU perHour s -Min perMin
1 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
The junction diagram reflects the last run of Junctions.
Analysis Options Calculate Queue Calculate residual Residual capacity criteria Average Delay threshold Queue threshold RFC Threshold Percentiles capacity type (s) (PCU) ü Delay 0.85 36.00 20.00
Demand Set Summary ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D1 2026 + Com + Gen AM ONE HOUR 07:45 09:15 15 D2 2026 + Com + Gen PM ONE HOUR 16:45 18:15 15 D3 2026 + Com + Gen SAT ONE HOUR 12:15 13:45 15
Analysis Set Details ID Network flow scaling factor (%) A1 100.000
2 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, AM
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 1 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 1.82 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 148 Stream B-AC
Arms
Arms Arm Name Description Arm type A Stobcross Road (east) Major B Site Access Minor C Stobcross Road (west) Major
Major Arm Geometry Width of carriageway Has kerbed central Has right turn Visibility for right turn Blocking queue Arm Blocks? (m) reserve bay (m) (PCU) C - Stobcross Road (west) 7.30 100.0 ü 0.00 Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D.
Minor Arm Geometry Arm Minor arm type Lane width (m) Visibility to left (m) Visibility to right (m) B - Site Access One lane 3.65 21 16
Slope / Intercept / Capacity
Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts Slope Slope Slope Slope Intercept Stream for for for for (PCU/hr) A-B A-C C-A C-B B-A 524 0.090 0.228 0.143 0.325 B-C 675 0.098 0.247 - - C-B 632 0.231 0.231 - -
The slopes and intercepts shown above do NOT include any corrections or adjustments. Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted. Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments.
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D1 2026 + Com + Gen AM ONE HOUR 07:45 09:15 15
3 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 196 100.000 B - Site Access ü 125 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 464 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 5 191 From B - Site Access 16 0 109 C - Stobcross Road (west) 432 32 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.24 8.94 0.3 A C-AB 0.08 5.11 0.2 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
07:45 - 08:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 94 604 0.156 93 0.2 7.761 A C-AB 40 815 0.049 40 0.1 5.107 A C-A 309 309 A-B 4 4 A-C 144 144
4 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
08:00 - 08:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 112 594 0.189 112 0.3 8.216 A C-AB 53 852 0.062 53 0.1 4.957 A C-A 364 364 A-B 4 4 A-C 172 172
08:15 - 08:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 138 580 0.237 137 0.3 8.938 A C-AB 75 904 0.083 74 0.2 4.774 A C-A 436 436 A-B 6 6 A-C 210 210
08:30 - 08:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 138 580 0.237 138 0.3 8.944 A C-AB 75 904 0.083 75 0.2 4.779 A C-A 436 436 A-B 6 6 A-C 210 210
08:45 - 09:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 112 594 0.189 113 0.3 8.236 A C-AB 53 852 0.062 53 0.1 4.960 A C-A 364 364 A-B 4 4 A-C 172 172
09:00 - 09:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 94 604 0.156 94 0.2 7.779 A C-AB 40 815 0.049 40 0.1 5.112 A C-A 309 309 A-B 4 4 A-C 144 144
5 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, PM
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 1 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 2.03 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 81 Stream C-AB
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D2 2026 + Com + Gen PM ONE HOUR 16:45 18:15 15
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 290 100.000 B - Site Access ü 57 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 554 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 16 274 From B - Site Access 7 0 50 C - Stobcross Road (west) 445 109 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
6 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.11 8.14 0.1 A C-AB 0.30 6.30 0.8 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
16:45 - 17:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 43 584 0.074 43 0.1 7.314 A C-AB 140 808 0.173 139 0.4 5.912 A C-A 277 277 A-B 12 12 A-C 206 206
17:00 - 17:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 51 569 0.090 51 0.1 7.641 A C-AB 187 845 0.221 186 0.5 6.020 A C-A 311 311 A-B 14 14 A-C 246 246
17:15 - 17:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 63 549 0.114 63 0.1 8.137 A C-AB 266 897 0.297 265 0.8 6.284 A C-A 344 344 A-B 18 18 A-C 302 302
17:30 - 17:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 63 549 0.114 63 0.1 8.142 A C-AB 267 897 0.297 267 0.8 6.304 A C-A 343 343 A-B 18 18 A-C 302 302
7 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
17:45 - 18:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 51 569 0.090 51 0.1 7.649 A C-AB 188 846 0.222 189 0.5 6.050 A C-A 310 310 A-B 14 14 A-C 246 246
18:00 - 18:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 43 583 0.074 43 0.1 7.329 A C-AB 141 809 0.174 142 0.4 5.948 A C-A 276 276 A-B 12 12 A-C 206 206
8 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, SAT
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 1 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 1.47 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 185 Stream C-AB
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D3 2026 + Com + Gen SAT ONE HOUR 12:15 13:45 15
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 316 100.000 B - Site Access ü 64 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 334 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 8 308 From B - Site Access 8 0 56 C - Stobcross Road (west) 278 56 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
9 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.13 8.21 0.2 A C-AB 0.14 6.01 0.3 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
12:15 - 12:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 48 585 0.082 48 0.1 7.368 A C-AB 59 719 0.083 59 0.1 5.995 A C-A 192 192 A-B 6 6 A-C 232 232
12:30 - 12:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 58 572 0.101 57 0.1 7.702 A C-AB 76 738 0.104 76 0.2 5.991 A C-A 224 224 A-B 7 7 A-C 277 277
12:45 - 13:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 70 553 0.127 70 0.2 8.201 A C-AB 103 764 0.135 103 0.3 5.996 A C-A 265 265 A-B 9 9 A-C 339 339
13:00 - 13:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 70 553 0.127 70 0.2 8.206 A C-AB 103 764 0.135 103 0.3 6.002 A C-A 264 264 A-B 9 9 A-C 339 339
10 Generated on 12/03/2021 14:59:48 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
13:15 - 13:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 58 572 0.101 58 0.1 7.709 A C-AB 76 738 0.104 77 0.2 6.000 A C-A 224 224 A-B 7 7 A-C 277 277
13:30 - 13:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 48 585 0.082 48 0.1 7.380 A C-AB 60 719 0.083 60 0.2 6.012 A C-A 192 192 A-B 6 6 A-C 232 232
11 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay), Glasgow Transportation Assessment March 2021
Appendix H
Plot 2 Access Junctions 9 Output
Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Junctions 9 PICADY 9 - Priority Intersection Module Version: 9.5.1.7462 © Copyright TRL Limited, 2019 For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL: +44 (0)1344 379777 [email protected] www.trlsoftware.co.uk The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution
Filename: 20033 - Plot 2 Access Junction.j9 Path: W:\20000s\20033 - Glasgow Waters (Yorkhill Quay)\Traffic\Picady Report generation date: 12/03/2021 15:07:25
»2026 + Com + Gen, AM »2026 + Com + Gen, PM »2026 + Com + Gen, SAT
Summary of junction performance
AM PM SAT Network Network Network Set Queue Delay Set Queue Delay Set Queue Delay RFC LOS Residual RFC LOS Residual RFC LOS Residual ID (PCU) (s) ID (PCU) (s) ID (PCU) (s) Capacity Capacity Capacity 2026 + Com + Gen 176 % 108 % 159 % Stream B-AC 0.3 8.53 0.24 A 0.2 8.01 0.13 A 0.3 8.83 0.22 A
D1 D2 D3 [Stream B- [Stream C- [Stream B- Stream C-AB 0.3 5.32 0.12 A AC] 0.6 6.51 0.26 A AB] 0.3 6.73 0.18 A AC]
Values shown are the highest values encountered over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle. Network Residual Capacity indicates the amount by which network flow could be increased before a user-definable threshold (see Analysis Options) is met.
File summary
File Description
Title Plot 2 Access Junction Location Yorkhill Quay Site number Date 12/03/2021 Version Status (new file) Identifier Client Peel Ports Jobnumber 20033 Enumerator DBA\daniel.winnie Description
Units Distance units Speed units Traffic units input Traffic units results Flow units Average delay units Total delay units Rate of delay units m kph PCU PCU perHour s -Min perMin
1 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
The junction diagram reflects the last run of Junctions.
Analysis Options Calculate Queue Calculate residual Residual capacity criteria Average Delay threshold Queue threshold RFC Threshold Percentiles capacity type (s) (PCU) ü Delay 0.85 36.00 20.00
Demand Set Summary ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D1 2026 + Com + Gen AM ONE HOUR 07:45 09:15 15 D2 2026 + Com + Gen PM ONE HOUR 16:45 18:15 15 D3 2026 + Com + Gen SAT ONE HOUR 12:15 13:45 15
Analysis Set Details ID Network flow scaling factor (%) A1 100.000
2 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, AM
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 2 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 2.41 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 176 Stream B-AC
Arms
Arms Arm Name Description Arm type A Stobcross Road (east) Major B Site Access Minor C Stobcross Road (west) Major
Major Arm Geometry Width of carriageway Has kerbed central Has right turn Visibility for right turn Blocking queue Arm Blocks? (m) reserve bay (m) (PCU) C - Stobcross Road (west) 7.30 80.0 ü 0.00 Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D.
Minor Arm Geometry Arm Minor arm type Lane width (m) Visibility to left (m) Visibility to right (m) B - Site Access One lane 3.65 21 16
Slope / Intercept / Capacity
Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts Slope Slope Slope Slope Intercept Stream for for for for (PCU/hr) A-B A-C C-A C-B B-A 524 0.090 0.228 0.143 0.325 B-C 675 0.098 0.247 - - C-B 620 0.227 0.227 - -
The slopes and intercepts shown above do NOT include any corrections or adjustments. Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted. Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments.
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D1 2026 + Com + Gen AM ONE HOUR 07:45 09:15 15
3 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 86 100.000 B - Site Access ü 133 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 447 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 7 79 From B - Site Access 17 0 116 C - Stobcross Road (west) 398 49 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.24 8.53 0.3 A C-AB 0.12 5.32 0.3 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
07:45 - 08:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 100 624 0.160 99 0.2 7.521 A C-AB 59 804 0.073 58 0.1 5.306 A C-A 278 278 A-B 5 5 A-C 59 59
4 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
08:00 - 08:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 120 619 0.193 119 0.3 7.928 A C-AB 77 841 0.092 77 0.2 5.184 A C-A 325 325 A-B 6 6 A-C 71 71
08:15 - 08:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 146 611 0.240 146 0.3 8.518 A C-AB 107 891 0.120 106 0.3 5.049 A C-A 386 386 A-B 8 8 A-C 87 87
08:30 - 08:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 146 611 0.240 146 0.3 8.530 A C-AB 107 892 0.120 107 0.3 5.051 A C-A 385 385 A-B 8 8 A-C 87 87
08:45 - 09:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 120 619 0.193 120 0.3 7.947 A C-AB 77 841 0.092 77 0.2 5.193 A C-A 325 325 A-B 6 6 A-C 71 71
09:00 - 09:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 100 624 0.160 100 0.2 7.565 A C-AB 59 805 0.073 59 0.1 5.319 A C-A 277 277 A-B 5 5 A-C 59 59
5 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, PM
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 2 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 2.19 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 108 Stream C-AB
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D2 2026 + Com + Gen PM ONE HOUR 16:45 18:15 15
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 247 100.000 B - Site Access ü 65 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 452 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 15 232 From B - Site Access 8 0 57 C - Stobcross Road (west) 349 103 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
6 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.13 8.01 0.2 A C-AB 0.26 6.51 0.6 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
16:45 - 17:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 49 594 0.082 49 0.1 7.249 A C-AB 119 756 0.157 118 0.3 6.194 A C-A 221 221 A-B 11 11 A-C 175 175
17:00 - 17:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 58 583 0.100 58 0.1 7.553 A C-AB 155 785 0.197 154 0.4 6.289 A C-A 251 251 A-B 13 13 A-C 209 209
17:15 - 17:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 72 566 0.126 71 0.2 8.003 A C-AB 213 824 0.259 213 0.6 6.489 A C-A 284 284 A-B 17 17 A-C 255 255
17:30 - 17:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 72 566 0.126 72 0.2 8.009 A C-AB 214 824 0.259 214 0.6 6.505 A C-A 284 284 A-B 17 17 A-C 255 255
7 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
17:45 - 18:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 58 583 0.100 59 0.1 7.558 A C-AB 155 785 0.198 156 0.4 6.315 A C-A 251 251 A-B 13 13 A-C 209 209
18:00 - 18:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 49 594 0.082 49 0.1 7.265 A C-AB 119 757 0.158 120 0.3 6.229 A C-A 221 221 A-B 11 11 A-C 175 175
8 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
2026 + Com + Gen, SAT
Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings
Junction Network
Junctions Junction Name Junction type Major road direction Use circulating lanes Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS 1 Plot 2 Access Junction T-Junction Two-way 2.85 A
Junction Network Options Driving side Lighting Network residual capacity (%) First arm reaching threshold Left Normal/unknown 159 Stream B-AC
Traffic Demand
Demand Set Details ID Scenario name Time Period name Traffic profile type Start time (HH:mm) Finish time (HH:mm) Time segment length (min) D3 2026 + Com + Gen SAT ONE HOUR 12:15 13:45 15
Default vehicle mix Vehicle mix source PCU Factor for a HV (PCU) ü HV Percentages 2.00
Demand overview (Traffic) Arm Linked arm Use O-D data Average Demand (PCU/hr) Scaling Factor (%) A - Stobcross Road (east) ü 225 100.000 B - Site Access ü 118 100.000 C - Stobcross Road (west) ü 286 100.000
Origin-Destination Data Demand (PCU/hr) To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 0 12 213 From B - Site Access 15 0 103 C - Stobcross Road (west) 205 81 0
Vehicle Mix Heavy Vehicle Percentages To A - Stobcross Road (east) B - Site Access C - Stobcross Road (west) A - Stobcross Road (east) 10 10 10 From B - Site Access 10 10 10 C - Stobcross Road (west) 10 10 10
9 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
Results
Results Summary for whole modelled period Stream Max RFC Max Delay (s) Max Queue (PCU) Max LOS B-AC 0.22 8.83 0.3 A C-AB 0.18 6.73 0.3 A C-A A-B A-C
Main Results for each time segment
12:15 - 12:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 89 602 0.148 88 0.2 7.693 A C-AB 79 686 0.115 78 0.2 6.505 A C-A 137 137 A-B 9 9 A-C 160 160
12:30 - 12:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 106 592 0.179 106 0.2 8.137 A C-AB 99 700 0.142 99 0.2 6.588 A C-A 158 158 A-B 11 11 A-C 191 191
12:45 - 13:00 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 130 579 0.225 130 0.3 8.813 A C-AB 130 719 0.181 130 0.3 6.722 A C-A 185 185 A-B 13 13 A-C 235 235
13:00 - 13:15 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 130 579 0.225 130 0.3 8.825 A C-AB 130 719 0.181 130 0.3 6.731 A C-A 184 184 A-B 13 13 A-C 235 235
10 Generated on 12/03/2021 15:08:21 using Junctions 9 (9.5.1.7462)
13:15 - 13:30 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 106 592 0.179 106 0.2 8.156 A C-AB 99 700 0.142 100 0.2 6.601 A C-A 158 158 A-B 11 11 A-C 191 191
13:30 - 13:45 Total Demand Capacity Throughput Unsignalised Stream RFC End queue (PCU) Delay (s) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) level of service B-AC 89 602 0.148 89 0.2 7.722 A C-AB 79 687 0.115 79 0.2 6.527 A C-A 136 136 A-B 9 9 A-C 160 160
11