MIRA TECHNOLOGY PARK
Transport Assessment
April 2011
MIRA TECHNOLOGY PARK
Transport Assessment
April 2011
ATC Ref: 10/014‐A
Produced by
Advance Transportation Consulting Sandy Farm Business Centre The Sands Farnham Surrey GU10 1PX
Tel: 01252 782237 Email: [email protected]
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION & SCOPE OF DOCUMENT ...... 1 Overview ...... 1 Transportation Assessment Structure ...... 3
2. POLICY CONTEXT ...... 6 National Planning Policy ...... 6 Local Plan/Local Development Framework ...... 9 Local Transport Plan (LTP 3) ...... 11
3. SITE DESCRIPTION AND EXISTING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT CONDITIONS ...... 14 Development Site Location and Description ...... 14 MIRA Development Site Access and Existing Traffic and Parking Conditions ...... 16 Existing Traffic Conditions ‐ MIRA ...... 17 Distribution of MIRA vehicle trips ...... 18 Parking Conditions‐MIRA ...... 20 Basic Road Network Description and Conditions ...... 20 Existing Traffic Flows and Conditions – A5 (T) ...... 21 Personal Injury Accident Records (2005‐2010) ...... 22 Provision for Walk & Cycle Access ...... 24 Public Transport ...... 24
4. MASTERPLAN DEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED MEASURES FOR CAR AND NON CAR MODES .. 27 Development Proposals ...... 27 MIRA Offsite and Onsite Access and Highway Works...... 28 Onsite circulation, access and parking provision ...... 29 Offsite Highway (A5) Improvement Measures ...... 31 Proposed MIRA Masterplan Access Measures ‐ Non Car modes ...... 32
5. DEVELOPMENT RELATED TRAVEL DEMAND ...... 34 Traffic Generation‐Existing MIRA Uses ...... 34 Proposed Development Traffic Generation ...... 34 Distribution of MIRA Development trips ‐ A5 (T) and Wider Area ...... 37 TA Study Area Boundary Definition ...... 38 MIRA Development Access Traffic Distribution ...... 39
6. OUTLINE OF THE APPROACH TO MODELLING FUTURE CONDITIONS FOR THE BASELINE AND WITH MIRA DEVELOPMENT (DO MINIMUM/DO SOMETHING) SCENARIOS ...... 41 Background ...... 41
April 2011
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Future Year Baseline Model ...... 43 Future Year MIRA Do Minimum(DM) Model ...... 43 MIRA Masterplan Traffic Generation: ...... 43 Future Year MIRA Do Something (DS) Model ...... 47 Baseline Modelling Results and Analysis ...... 48 Traffic Flows ...... 48 Junction Operation ...... 50 Delays on Selected Routes within the modelled network...... 50 Average peak network speeds (Baseline) ...... 51
7. MIRA DO MINIMUM MODELLING RESULTS AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH BASELINE RUNS ...... 52 Summary of MIRA Do Minimum Modelling Results and comparison with the corresponding baseline model runs ...... 53 Junction operation ...... 54 Delays on Selected Routes (DM) ...... 61 Average Peak network speeds ...... 62 General Findings of the Comparative Do Minimum vs. Reference Modelling Exercise ...... 63 Development Traffic Impact –Junctions on the A5( T) To the West of The Model Boundary ...... 64
8. PROPOSED TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES AND MIRA DO SOMETHING MODELLING RESULTS AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH BASELINE RUNS ...... 65 Proposed Traffic Mitigation Measures ...... 65 Redgate Junction‐A444/A5 (T) ...... 66 Wood Lane/A5 (T) ...... 67 Higham Roundabout ...... 68 A47 Long Shoot/A5T) Signalised Junction ...... 69 Dodwells Roundabout ...... 70 MIRA Do Something Modelling Results and Comparative Analysis ...... 71 Traffic Flows ...... 72 Junction operation ...... 73 MIRA Site Access Capacities‐ARCADY/PICADY Assessments ...... 75 Delays on Selected Routes (DS) ...... 79 Average Peak network speeds ‐ DS ...... 80 General Findings of the Results ...... 80 Impact of Sustainable Transport Measures on MIRA Car based Demand ...... 81 MIRA Do Something Modelling Results with sustainable transport measures and Comparative Analysis ...... 82 Junction operation and Queues ...... 83 Delays on Selected Routes (DS+PT) ...... 88 Average Peak network speeds ...... 89
April 2011
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9. PROPOSED SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT MEASURES ...... 91 Walking ...... 91 Cycling ...... 91 Motorcycling ...... 96 Public Transport ...... 96
10. SECTION 278 AND SECTION 106 MEASURES AND PHASING DISCUSSIONS ...... 101 Section 278 Agreement Measures ...... 101 Phasing Discussion ...... 102 Section 106 Agreement ...... 103 Phasing Discussions...... 103
11. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 105 Existing site conditions ...... 105 Future conditions ...... 106 Development proposals ...... 106 MIRA A5 Access Measures ...... 107 Sustainable Transport Measures ...... 107 Approach to Development Traffic Impact Modelling ...... 107 Model Results and Analysis ...... 108
APPENDICES
Appendix A TA Scoping Note
Appendix B Existing Mira Areas
Appendix C Mira Traffic surveys
Appendix D Framework Travel Plan
Appendix E Hinckley and Nuneaton model results spreadsheet (ref/Dev)
PLANS
Plan 1 AM/PM Peak Link Flows 2021 – Ref, DM, DS and DS +PT
Plan 2 AM/PM Peak Average Speed 2021 – Ref, DM, DS and DS +PT
Plan 3 AM/PM Peak Average Delay 2021 – Ref, DM, DS and DS +PT
Plan 4 Proposed Access and Offsite Highway Improvements
Plan 5 Pedestrian / Cycle Routes (New + Enhancements to Existing)
April 2011
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
1. INTRODUCTION & SCOPE OF DOCUMENT
Overview
1.1 MIRA are proposing to expand their existing Research and Development facilities on their site in Atherstone adjacent to the A5 (T) in Warwickshire.
1.2 The MIRA Technology Park masterplan development proposals comprise the following:
“Development of business/technology campus comprising replacement MIRA headquarters, office, research and manufacturing facilities, hotel and local facilities including retail/café/restaurant, ancillary energy generation plant/equipment, internal access roads, car parking, landscaping, drainage and associated work and creation of new and improved points of access; widening of A5, associated earth works and landscaping.”
1.3 The key objective of the MIRA Technology Park masterplan is to design a world class technology campus. The businesses and organisations that will occupy the MIRA Technology Park are at the forefront of new transport technologies and as such there is a unique opportunity to positively change the culture and promote sustainable transport access amongst all users.
1.4 When fully completed the MIRA Technology Park will provide a total of around 162,000m2 GFA of floorspace comprising the following:
Existing MIRA Uses ( to be retained) ‐ 22,302m2
Use Class B1(b) Research & Development ‐ 118,413m2
Use Class B1(a) Offices ‐ 14,303m2
Use Class C3 Hotel ‐ 4,500m2 (100 beds)
Use Class A1 Local Retail Facilities ‐ 500m2
Use Class A3 Restaurants ‐ 1,000m2
Use Class D2 Fitness Club ‐ 1,000m2
1.5 It should be noted that some24,411m2 of existing MIRA development on the site will be demolished in the coming years, and so the actual net increase in R+D uses on the site would actually increase by 94,002m2.
1.6 Development of the MIRA Technology Park will be phased, with the first of the new buildings being completed for occupation by the end of the year 2013 and the full development is not anticipated to be completed until the year 2021. When fully occupied the MIRA Technology Park will employ of the order
April 2011 ‐ 1 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
of 3000 people, creating over 2,000 jobs in addition to the 700 people who are presently employed/contracted by MIRA and the associated businesses within the existing MIRA site.
1.7 The new development would take place within the existing area that is occupied by the MIRA facilities, as well as on adjacent land just to the north. A majority of this development would take place in the central and western zones of the site that are located close to the A5. The development within the Proving Ground zone would remain in operation and unaffected (save for access) by the masterplan proposals.
1.8 As indicate above, around 24,400m2 of existing MIRA buildings/facilities would be demolished over time and subsumed within the new development.
1.9 Whilst MIRA has a clear business vision as well as an understanding of the market demand, it is not possible for them at this stage to put forward fully detailed proposals for development within the zone on a plot by plot basis.
1.10 However, it was recognised from the outset is would be necessary for them and their appointed design team to first devise a masterplan and framework for development on which they could base their future business case, and to then go on and to obtain approval from all interested parties to the proposals and the key parameters.
1.11 In this way, having obtained approval for the overall Masterplan and the quantum and general form of development contained therein, one could then commence with implementation of specific development on a plot by plot basis, with at least a clear understanding as to what would or would not be agreed, and what conditions and obligations would need to be met.
1.12 A key component of the Masterplan Development relates to the traffic and sustainable transport issues. In relation to the former, the site is located adjacent to the A5 (T) which is a busy Trunk Road that functions not only as a strategic link between two Motorways, but also collects and distributes traffic associated with the local road network that serves the nearby towns and settlements. The impact of additional traffic on the free flow and safety of this road network was identified as a critical aspect.
1.13 In relation to the latter, the masterplan site is located some distance from nearby settlements and is currently not accessible by any means other than a car. For any new development to progress on the site it was recognised that to accord with policy a comprehensive package of sustainable transport measures should be implemented. In this way employees and visitors would at least have a realistic choice of non‐car modes to access both the existing and planned facilities in future.
1.14 In light of the traffic and transport issues, extensive discussions have taken place over a period of some 6 months, with the 3 main interested parties in this regard, namely the Highways Agency (and their Term Consultants AECOM), Warwickshire County Council and Leicestershire County Council. These discussions centred around the scope of the Transport Assessment (TA) that was required in support of the Masterplan, and at the same time, the form of any vehicular access from the A5(T), the approach to
April 2011 ‐ 2 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
the modelling and traffic impact exercise, and the agreed package of sustainable transport measures to be implemented as development comes forward.
1.15 It was agreed from the outset that any TA in support of the Masterplan Application should clearly demonstrate that the development could be made sustainable from a transport standpoint, and that the impact of any traffic generated would not give rise to unacceptable operational, safety or environmental conditions in future. It was also agreed that any traffic mitigation measures and sustainable transport measures should ultimately be included within a Section 278 agreement for Trunk Road Related works, and within a Section 106 in relation to the sustainable transport measures (excluding those physical works to be implemented within the Trunk Road corridor).
1.16 For the purposes of the Planning Application, it is proposed that the red line would encompass the site and that all matters would be reserved, save for the Masterplan access itself i.e. the proposed junctions that would provide access to the zone from the A5 (T). In this way any junction location and configuration on the A5 would be fixed.
1.17 Parameter Plans would however be included with the application to indicate the principles and design elements (e.g. landscaping, on site circulation, general disposition of zones).
1.18 Finally, in addition to the preparation of a TA, it was agreed that a Framework Travel Plan in support of the Masterplan development should be form an integral part of the TA and Application process.
1.19 In light of these discussions, a Summary Scoping Note was prepared and agreed (see Appendix A) The strategic Nuneaton and Hinckley PARAMICS model was first updated by JMP. Then, having had this agreed with all interested parties, they went on to run to assess the impact of the MIRA development traffic that was agreed would be generated in the AM and PM peaks future years (2017, 2018 and 2021). Mitigation measures were then devised to address the network “problems” and included and tested within the modelling exercise, with the aim of demonstrating ‘nil detriment.‘ In parallel with this work, meetings took place with key parties and a package of sustainable transport measures were worked up and agreed.
1.20 This Transport Assessment considers the MIRA Masterplan development and addresses the associated Traffic and Transport issues in detail.
Transportation Assessment Structure
1.21 The Transport Assessment is structured as follows:
Section 2: Policy context
1.22 Within this section is provided an outline of key relevant Planning Policy Guidance, Regional Policy, County Council and LPA policies pertaining to traffic and transport considerations.
April 2011 ‐ 3 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Section 3: Site description and existing traffic and transport conditions.
1.23 Within this section the existing development uses and areas on site are described. In addition the access arrangements are outlined along with the parking and measures for pedestrians.
1.24 A description of external road network is also provided and includes the arrangements for public transport, pedestrians and cyclists.
1.25 Traffic conditions associated with the existing MIRA site and on the external road network are described, based on surveys and the model runs for the reference scenario.
Section 4: Development proposals and associated measures for car and non‐car modes.
1.26 Within this section the Masterplan development uses and areas are identified and the approach to phasing is described. The approach and design of vehicular access strategy from A5(T) is then described in some detail. Onsite, the section addresses the basic principles of circulation, access and parking provision
1.27 At the same time the measures for public transport and pedestrians/cyclists are also described.
Section 5: Development related travel demand.
1.28 Within this section is provided the agreed approach to the traffic generation associated with each use and the impact of the sustainable transport measures on modal shift and vehicle trip rates.
1.29 In addition, the Section addresses the approach to the general distribution of MIRA traffic on the road network based on the routings of existing staff recorded from the journey to work surveys.
Section 6: Outline of the approach to modelling future conditions and development traffic impact.
1.30 An outline summary of the area wide modelling exercise and updating exercise undertaken by JMP in relation to the reference and future base line model runs is provided in this section. The approach taken in relation to the model runs with MIRA development and phases are also described. Finally, the approach adopted to assessing impact beyond the model boundary, but within the TA Study Area Boundary, is also outlined.
Section 7: Baseline results and analysis (2011, 2015, 2018 and 2021)
1.31 The PARAMICS model was first run to assess network operation in future for the situation without the MIRA Masterplan development. This section summarises the results of the runs and identifies where operational/capacity problems will arise on the network in future.
April 2011 ‐ 4 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Section 8: Development traffic impact results and analysis (2015, 2018 and 2021)
1.32 Within this section the results of the Do Minimum runs (i.e. with MIRA but without mitigation) are compared with the Baseline or reference results. A summary of the basic approaches to assessment with MIRA Masterplan development and access is provided i.e. from the JMP PARAMICS results identifying the flow changes, junctions where queues and delays generally worsen and the journey time/delay analysis of the 10 selected routes within the modelled area.
Section 9: Traffic mitigation measures (2015, 2018 and 2021)
1.33 Within this section those areas of the network where material impact was identified in the Do Minimum model runs are highlighted and descriptions of proposed mitigation measures are then provided. Results of the Do Something model assessments with mitigation (both traffic measures and then once more with sustainable transport measures) are then compared with the corresponding baseline runs and key conclusions then drawn.
Section 10: Sustainable transport measures.
1.34 The measures that are proposed for pedestrians and cyclists both within and around the site (routes, stands, MIRAbike etc.) and off site i.e. cycle routes along the A5 and south to Nuneaton are outlined in this section.
1.35 The proposed approach to public transport provision to serve the site (with phasing) is also described in this section. The measures described not only include the basic infrastructure provision i.e. lay‐bys and shelters, but also the services to be provided.
Section 11: S278 and S106 traffic and transport measures and phasing discussions
1.36 Within this section is provided an itemised list of what traffic and transport measures are proposed to be implemented within the S106 Planning and S278 Highway agreements. At the same time, the issue of the timing of the implementation of the measures is discussed.
Section 12: Summary and Conclusions
1.37 Within this final section of the TA is provided a general summary of the TA findings and recommendations. At the same time some key conclusions are drawn as to the extent to which the proposed transport strategy in support of the MIRA Masterplan achieves policy guidance, mitigates impact on A5 and general highway network, satisfactorily addresses access/development phasing, and makes adequate provision for public transport and pedestrian/cyclists such that the Draft Framework Travel Plan has the best possible chance of success.
April 2011 ‐ 5 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
2. POLICY CONTEXT
National Planning Policy
2.1 In the context of National Planning Policy as contained within PPS1, PPS4 and PPG13, the key aims in respect of highways and access matters are to promote more sustainable transport choices, promote accessibility to jobs and services by public transport, walking and cycling; and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car. The guidance therefore seeks to:
Promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight;
Promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling;
Reduce the need to travel, especially by car.
2.2 In overall terms, the planning policy seeks to achieve this balance by integrating land use and transport policy to create more sustainable development by appropriate location and design.
2.3 The Government’s 2004 White Paper for Transport “The Future of Transport ‐ a network for 2030” outlines key principles that will be the driving force of a national transport strategy, the key aims of which are:
Sustained investment;
Better management of transport;
Quality partnerships to deliver better public transport;
Planning ahead and linking decisions on transport to decisions on liveability, sustainable communities and other policy areas; and
Ensuring that social, economic and environmental costs and benefits of transport proposals are fully recognised.
2.4 The Government has agreed a shared priority for transport with the Local Government Association. The shared priority is:
“Improving access to jobs and services, particularly for those most in need, in ways that are sustainable: improving public transport; reducing problems of congestion, pollution and safety.”
April 2011 ‐ 6 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
PPS1: Sustainable Development
2.5 PPS1 places an emphasis upon development being in sustainable locations that offer good levels of accessibility by foot, cycle and public transport to, amongst others, employment uses thereby minimising the need to travel and reducing reliance on the use of the car.
PPS4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth
2.6 Para 10 of PPS4 outlines the Government’s objectives for planning to help achieve sustainable economic growth one of which is to “deliver more sustainable patterns of development, reduce the need to travel, especially by car and respond to climate change.” Under Policy EC2 of PPS4, bullet point e.), PPS 4 seeks to locate “...developments which generate substantial transport movements in locations that are accessible...”
2.7 Policy EC10 requires that all planning application for economic development should be assessed against “...the accessibility of the proposal by a choice of means of transport including walking, cycling, public transport and the car...” in line with the DfT ‘Guidance on Transport Assessments (2007)’.
PPG13: Transport
2.8 In the context of the proposed development and its location, PPG13: Transport at para. 6 provides an overall summary of the mechanisms required to ensure the delivery of the objectives set out in paragraph 2.1 above. The requirements are to ensure that:
Growth is managed to make the best use of locations that are accessible by public transport;
Facilities are located so that they are accessible by walking and cycling;
All types of land use are accessible and offer a realistic choice of access by public transport, walking and cycling;
Parking policies are used alongside other planning and transport measures to reduce reliance upon the car for work and other journeys;
Priority is given to people of ease of traffic movements and plan to provide more road space to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport;
The needs of disabled people are taken account of.
2.9 Para. 28 of PPG13 refers to design and safety considerations as well as the proposed mix of uses in promoting development. It states:
April 2011 ‐ 7 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
“New development should help to create places that connect sustainably, providing the right connections to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport. People should come before traffic. Places that work are well designed to be used safely and securely by all in the community, frequently for a wide range of purposes throughout the day and evening.”
2.10 In respect of managing travel demand, paragraph 48 of PPG13 states:
“Quick and easy interchange is essential for integration within and between different types of transport. Local Authorities should promote more sustainable transport choices by…ensuring that interchange points are well related to travel generating uses and that the design, layout and access arrangements of surrounding development and interchanges are safe and convenient so as to maximise the walking and cycling catchment population for public transport services…”
2.11 Travel demand is also addressed in the context of parking in paragraph 49 of PPG13. It states that “…the availability of car parking has a major influence on the choice of means of transport.” It also considers that at the same time “…the amount of good quality cycle parking in developments should be increased to promote more cycle use.”
2.12 In paragraph 51 of PPG13, the guidance suggests that Local Authorities should, in developing and implementing policies on parking:
“ensure that…levels of parking in association with development will promote sustainable transport choices;
not require developers to provide more spaces than they themselves wish…;
encourage the shared use of parking…so as to reduce the total space taken up by parking in development…;
…require convenient, safe and secure cycle parking in development at least at levels consistent with the cycle strategy in the local transport plan.”
2.13 In paragraphs 72‐74 of PPG13, specific guidance is provided in relation to the availability of public transport and the role it plays in determining locational policies to reduce reliance upon the private car.
2.14 Paragraph 75 of PPG13: Transport also states that “…walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly under 2 kilometres.” Paragraph 78 of PPG13: Transport also indicates that “…cycling also has the potential to substitute for short car trips, particularly those under 5km….”
2.15 Paragraphs 87‐91 of PPG13 set out in detail guidance related to Travel Plans within which paragraph 88 summarises the sustainable transport objectives as being:
April 2011 ‐ 8 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Reductions in car usage (particularly single occupancy journeys) and increased use of public transport, walking and cycling;
Reduced traffic speeds and improved road safety and personal security, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists; and
More environmentally friendly delivery and freight movements including home delivery services.”
2.16 In paragraph 90, the three key objectives with respect to Travel Plans are set out, these being:
“They should be worked up in consultation with the Local Authority and local transport providers;
They should have measurable outputs that may relate to targets in a Local Transport Plan; and
They should set out arrangements for monitoring the progress of a plan, as well as arrangements for enforcement in the event that the objectives are not met.”
Local Plan/Local Development Framework
2.17 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) the Local Plans in both Hinckley & Bosworth and North Warwickshire are gradually being replaced by the Development Plan Documents which form part of the Local Development Framework (LDF). The Hinckley & Bosworth Core Strategy has been published. The North Warwickshire is due to be published in early 2011.
Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy
2.18 The Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy was adopted in December 2009 and forms the basis for the Local Development Framework (LDF) and sets out the spatial planning framework for LPA until 2026.
2.19 In the context of transport related matters pertinent to the proposed MIRA Technology Park, Policy 1 of the core strategy seeks to ensure there is a range of employment opportunities within Hinckley. Policy 14 also seeks to deliver safe cycle paths within the rural parishes to, in part, deliver safe routes to employment areas.
2.20 In Policy 12 of the Core Strategy specific mention is made of the delivery of safe cycle routes from Higham on the Hill into Hinckley and Nuneaton and to MIRA itself with developer contributions and / or land sought towards their implementation.
2.21 The Core Strategy also recognises that the area has high reliance on the car, with some 72% of employed people within the LPA as a whole currently travelling to work by car. The Core Strategy goes onto to say in paragraph 3.31 that “Congestion and the impact of heavy vehicle movement is a problem, particularly in areas along the A5 corridor and Earl Shilton”.
April 2011 ‐ 9 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
2.22 Under the provision of the 2004 Act the majority of the existing Local Plan documents have been saved until the finalised LDFs have been published. The key objectives outlined in each of the Local Plans are outlined below.
Hinckley & Bosworth Local Plan
2.23 The key objectives of the adopted Hinckley and Bosworth Local Plan (2001) are as follows:
Objective 1a) To facilitate growth in the economy without adversely affecting the environment of local communities;
Objective 1c) To encourage, where appropriate the re‐use and redevelopment of derelict, vacant and underused land in preference of greenfield sites.
Objective 3c) To avoid allocating development where traffic generated will, in combination with existing proposed developments, cause the existing road capacity to be exceeded or significantly impair the safety of the road system.
Objective 3i) To meet the transport needs of those people, who live, work and visit the borough and, wherever possible, provide alternatives to the use of the car as a means of transport
Objective 4a) To protect and enhance the natural environment, sites designated as being of Natural History importance and other wildlife habits including trees, woodland, grasslands and marshes.
Objective 5b) To ensure that major employment sites are located in transport choice locations and that all sites are easily accessible by both the road network and by means other than the private car and to ensure a high standard of layout and design including, where appropriate, measures to promote energy efficiency
Objective 7b) Where appropriate to seek contributions from developer towards infrastructure works and the provision of facilities that are required to support development proposals.
North Warwickshire Local Plan
2.24 The key objectives of the adopted North Warwickshire Local Plan (2006) are as follows:
Play our strategic part by restraining new development and providing for new development sufficient to meet, but not exceed strategic requirements,
Make our settlements more sustainable through appropriate development and improvements, including better transport facilities and by recognising local character and distinctiveness,
Protect our countryside from inappropriate development and seek to protect, preserve and enhance the Borough’s natural, cultural and historic heritage,
April 2011 ‐ 10 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Add quality to all development proposals and in significant developments to pursue legal agreements for mitigation and improvements
Local Transport Plan (LTP 3)
2.25 The Local Transport Plan (LTP 3) outlines the priorities and programmes through which integrated and sustainable transport measures can be delivered locally, whilst also recognising that the car will remain a vital element in the country’s transport system.
2.26 Through consultations with elected members, stakeholders and the public each county council has created a number of transport related goals and objectives that they would like the LTP 3 to deliver over the short, medium and long term. These goals/ challenges for each county council are outlined in the following paragraphs.
Leicestershire’s Local Transport Plan (LTP 3)
2.27 Leicestershire have outlined six key strategic transport goals that have been designed to respond to strategic challenges that that have been identified in previous consultations. These goals and objectives have been outlined below;
Goal 1: a transport system that supports a prosperous economy and provides successfully for population growth.
Goal 2: an efficient, resilient and sustainable transport system that is well managed and maintained.
Goal 3: a transport system that helps to reduce the carbon footprint of Leicestershire.
Goal 4: an accessible and integrated transport system that helps promotes equality of opportunity for all our residents.
Goal 5: a transport system that improves the safety, health and security of our residents.
Goal 6: a transport system that helps to improve the quality of life for our residents and makes Leicestershire a more attractive place to live, work and visit
2.28 In accordance with the six goals, Leicestershire’s have outlined nine strategic outcomes that they would like the LTP 3 to deliver.
Our transport system provides more consistent, predictable and reliable journey times for the movement of people and goods;
All residents have efficient, easy and affordable access to key services (such as employment, education, health care and food shopping), particularly by public transport, bike and on food;
Our transport system and its assets are effectively managed and well maintained;
April 2011 ‐ 11 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Our transport system is resilient to the impacts of climate change;
The negative impact of our transport system on the environment and individuals is reduced;
More people walk, cycle and use public transport as part of their daily journeys;
The number of road casualties is reduced;
There is improved satisfaction with the transport system amongst both users and residents;
The natural environment can be accessed easily and efficiently, particularly by bike or on foot;
Warwickshire’s Local Transport Plan (LTP 3)
2.29 The key challenges and solutions outlined in Warwickshire’s LTP 3 have been outlined below.
Challenge 1.1: Improve the connectivity by public transport to enable business journeys to take place and to maximise accessibility of labour markets to jobs.
Solution: Improvement to buses
Challenge 1.3: Support the delivery of planned housing and employment growth in ways whilst minimising congestion level
Solution: Cycling and pedestrian links to key destinations and Work Place Travel Plans.
Challenge 2.1: Accommodate new development in locations which reduce need to travel
Solution: Better integration of transport and land use planning to reduce the need to travel
Challenge 2.2: Encourage a shift to lower carbon forms of travel, including walking, cycling and public transport, for residents and businesses
Solution: Develop cycle routes in and around our main town & Cycle parking at key destination
Challenge 3.3 Encourage a shift towards more healthy forms of travel, including encouraging a more positive public perception of walking and cycling
Solution: Introduce pool bicycles (Bike Hubs) for individual use within main town
2.30 The purpose of this Transport Assessment is to consider the implications of development related travel on the operation of the surrounding highway and transport networks. Furthermore, this assessment will consider the appropriateness of development in this location in transport policy terms, having due regard to the need to ensure that it is accessible by all modes of travel.
April 2011 ‐ 12 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
2.31 The assessment will demonstrate that in terms of planning Policy at both National and Local level with respect to issues such as sustainability and traffic impact, the application site development can be accommodated.
April 2011 ‐ 13 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3. SITE DESCRIPTION AND EXISTING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT CONDITIONS
Development Site Location and Description
3.1 The development site is located just to the north of the A5 (T). The settlement of Higham on the Hill lies some 1 km to the east and Atherstone some 6 kms to the west. The main settlements of Nuneaton and Hinckley are located some 4 kms to the south and 6 kms to the east. The sites location is indicated in Figure 3.1 below
Figure 3.1 Site Location
3.2 The Masterplan Application site extends to cover an area of around 71 ha, although the overall land area that is owned by MIRA (including the Track etc.) is far greater and is largely undeveloped. The site is bounded to the south by the A5 (T) and by the disused railway line to the east. To the west and north it is bounded by open fields.
3.3 Within the site the existing development is clustered around 2 principal areas of activity. The first, to the south, and the second to the north within the central area of the overall zone. The latter covers a wider area as it includes the test tracks (Proving Ground).
April 2011 ‐ 14 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3.4 The southern area of development is occupied by around 24,400m2 of R+D facilities (including offices, workshops, and laboratories) that are predominantly occupied by MIRA.
3.5 The central/northern area i.e. the Proving Ground is occupied by a further 22,300m2 of development in numerous buildings that are clustered around the Proving Ground Track facilities. The buildings in this location are leased to motor industry and research related companies. The existing uses and buildings on the site are indicated below in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.2 Existing MIRA Uses and Buildings
3.6 A schedule of these existing uses within the MIRA site is provided in Appendix B.
3.7 Sole access to the MIRA site is provided by way of a simple priority T junction that is located on the A5 (T) at a point some 280 metres from the site’s eastern boundary. The access road from this junction then leads in a northerly direction into the site for a distance of around 450 metres, at which point is located a security office where all visitors are required to stop and obtain clearance before entering the main area.
3.8 Once beyond the security checkpoint the main access then heads northwards and bends slightly westwards. Access is the provided to the development that is located to the west of the road.
April 2011 ‐ 15 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3.9 Around 500 metres to the north is located a junction and bridge crossing to the east that runs over the Proving Ground Track below. This is the access to the Proving Ground Area and due to its restricted width, operates under signalised control. If one stays on the access road leading to the north, this reduces in width to 4.5‐6.0 metres, and simply provides access to the northern area of the site and some Proving Ground related activities.
3.10 Once within the Proving Ground area the access road provides access to each of the individual buildings including the observation tower beside the track. One can exit this area either by crossing back over the entrance bridge as described above, or instead leave by way of the exit only route that heads southwards and under the track.
3.11 The existing access and general circulation arrangements that serve the existing MIRA facilities are indicated above in Figure 3.2.
3.12 At this time, no bus facilities are provided within the site and the only facilities for pedestrians i.e. a footway, is provided alongside the main access road (MIRA Drive) between the main junction on the A5 (T) and the security checkpoint.
3.13 A total of around 878 parking spaces are currently provided within the overall MIRA zone, although it is possible for vehicles to also park on the abundant areas of hard standing that is provided in many locations.
MIRA Development Site Access and Existing Traffic and Parking Conditions
3.14 As indicated above, a single point of vehicular access is provided to serve the entire MIRA site. This access is provided on the A5 (T) and takes the form of a major priority junction, with a separate right turn lane being provided on the A5 (T) to facilitate this traffic demand. At this location the A5 (T) widens to 10‐11 metres in order to accommodate this facility, which runs for a distance of 80 metres along the Trunk Road.
3.15 In this particular section of the A5 (T) as it passes the MIRA site it is designed to single carriageway standard. This remains the case to the east as it narrows further and passes over the former railway line and passes the Wood Lane junction some 300 metres to the east. To the west of the site, the A5 widens to dual carriageway standard with a wide central reserve of between 6 metres and 8 metres being provided.
3.16 A speed limit of 50 mph is in force at this location on the A5 (T).
3.17 Whilst a pedestrian footway is provided along the north side of the A5 (T), and across the site frontage and the main access, the junction is unlit.
3.18 Where the access (Mira Drive) meets the A5 (T) it widens to 8 metres, with sufficient width to permit both left and right turning traffic to stand and then exit at the give way line.
April 2011 ‐ 16 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3.19 Once within the site the main access road narrows down to 6 metres.
Existing Traffic Conditions ‐ MIRA
3.20 The existing MIRA development and the existing MIRA employees, MIRA subcontractors and clients (around 690 staff in total) who are located within the site generate traffic movements throughout the day. All of this traffic passes through the main access on the A5 (T).
3.21 In order to establish the existing traffic and travel demand associated with the existing development on the site an Automatic Traffic Counter was installed for a period of one week between 23 February 2010 and 1 March 2010 to record 2 way travel movements (n.b. classified into vehicle types). A classified vehicle turning count was also undertaken at the junction of MIRA Drive and the A5 (T) during the same week as the ATC was down. This survey took place between 0700‐1900.
3.22 The results of these survey exercises are contained within Appendix D. However, in summary it was evident that the existing MIRA site generated the following levels of traffic on the peak day (a Wednesday):
878 vehicle arrivals and 877 vehicle departures over the peak day (a Wednesday)
244 vehicle arrivals and 20 vehicle departure during the AM peak hour (0800‐0900)
22 vehicle arrivals and 203 vehicle departure during the PM peak hour (1700‐1800)
3.23 The 3 hour profiles of existing surveyed peak arrivals and departures are indicated in figures 3.3a and 3.3b below.
Figure 3.3a MIRA existing traffic flows ‐ Hourly Arrival profiles
Time Period Hourly Period Arrivals
0700‐0800 166
AM Peak 0800‐0900 244
0900‐1000 61
1600‐1700 16
PM Peak 1700‐1800 22
1800‐1900 19
April 2011 ‐ 17 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 3.3b MIRA existing traffic flows – Hourly departure profiles
Time Period Hourly Period Departures
0700‐0800 14
AM Peak 0800‐0900 20
0900‐1000 14
1600‐1700 65
PM Peak 1700‐1800 203
1800‐1900 163
3.24 It can be seen that from the surveys it can be seen that the AM peak period is spread over a period of 3 hours, and similarly in the PM peak. It is clear however that peak demand takes place during the 0800‐ 0900 and 1700‐1800 periods. The surveys indicated that only 4.5% of the traffic movements generated by the existing MIRA development consists of larger vehicles.
3.25 From observations on site it was evident that there were occasions when this traffic exiting the MIRA site on the access in the PM peak in particular was required to wait for a gap in the traffic stream on the A5 (T).
Distribution of MIRA vehicle trips
3.26 From both the classified turning count survey at the main access junction as well as from the questionnaire of employees that was undertaken to establish their journey to work routings it was established that around 65% of staff accessed the MIRA site from/to the A5 (T) east and the remaining 35% of staff accessed the MIRA site from the west. Around 20% had an origin and destination beyond the M69 Motorway Intersection, and under 18% beyond the M42 intersection to the west. The remaining 62% of employees are therefore drawn from a relatively tight catchment around the MIRA site. This is highlighted below in figures 3.4a and 3.4b in which the % distribution of employee trips during the AM and PM peaks are indicated.
April 2011 ‐ 18 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 3.4a AM Peak Employee Routes to Work
Figure 3.4b PM Peak Employee Routes to Work
April 2011 ‐ 19 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Parking Conditions‐MIRA
3.27 As indicated above, a total of 878 parking spaces are currently provided within the site in association with the existing development. Observations were made of the number of spaces that were occupied at the beginning and end of the daily survey period and basic accumulation assessments were then undertaken to establish the maximum number of the spaces were occupied at any one time during the day. From these assessments that are included in Appendix C it was established that a maximum demand for 526 spaces arose during the peak day. This demand corresponds to 1 space /83m2 of development taking into account the current areas of existing development on the site.
Basic Road Network Description and Conditions
3.28 As indicated above, the sole access serving MIRA is connected to the A5 (T), a Trunk Road that connects the M69 some 8 kms to the east with the M42 some 13 kms to the west. The section of A5 (T) that includes the MIRA access is therefore some 21 kms in length.
3.29 The A5(T) performs a number of important traffic functions namely:
A strategic role linking the 2 Motorways to the east and west
Collecting and distributing traffic with origins and destinations in the key settlements that are relocated in the vicinity of the road (Hinckley, Atherstone, Nuneaton etc.), as well as the key roads that intersect with this main road
Providing access to the developments that front this road (e.g. MIRA , Birch Coppice Business Park etc.)
3.30 Unlike its Roman forebear Watling Street, along whose line most of this section of the A5 (T) runs, it is not designed with any consistency in terms of its width, being dual carriageway in some sections and single carriageway in others. It is evident that the widening has taken place where both urban and land ownership constraints have had less of an influence.
3.31 Along its length and between the 2 grade separated Motorway intersections to the east and west are located a total of 12 main junctions. All of these junctions are at grade in terms of their design and are a mix of configurations that include high capacity priority, roundabout and signalised junctions.
3.32 The locations of these main junctions on the A5(T) and their current configurations are highlighted below in figure 3.5
April 2011 ‐ 20 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 3.5 Principal A5(T) Junctions‐Section M69/MIRA/M42
3.33 On the approaches to these junctions the A5 (T) may flare to 2/3 lanes. A number of the junctions (A444/Redgate, Higham Roundabout Long Shoot, and Dodwells) also accommodate relatively heavy crossing movements that result in queue build ups on the main side roads at peaks.
Existing Traffic Flows and Conditions – A5 (T)
A5 (T) – Main Link
3.34 Traffic data was made available for the A5(T) in the vicinity of the MIRA site through Highways Agency TRADS data (there is a survey station just east of the existing MIRA access) as well as from the survey that was undertaken on the access in April 2010.
3.35 These surveys indicated that in the vicinity of the MIRA access the A5(T) carries around 19,300 vehicles over a weekday, with around 15% of this being OGVS/HGVS. The same surveys indicate that the road is tidal in nature at peaks with the westbound predominating in the AM and the eastbound movement predominating in the PM peak.
3.36 From the strategic Nuneaton and Hinckley PARAMICS model that forms the basis of the TA, it was evident that whilst the traffic flow along the different sections of the A5 (T) varies, the variation between the different sections in terms of hourly peak flows was quite significant. This is highlighted below in figure 3.6 in which are indicated the 2011 model flows on sections in the AM peak hour. From this it can be seen that the traffic flows on the A5 to the west of the MIRA access are significantly higher than on the section to the east of the MIRA access.
April 2011 ‐ 21 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 3.6 Peak Traffic Flows –A5(T)
A5 (T) – Main Junctions
3.37 What was evident when one considers the main junctions along the A5 (T) corridor is that conditions are most critical at the following junctions during the existing peaks:
A444/A5(T) Redgate Staggered T Junction (AM) –1.4 kms to the west
The existing MIRA Access junction (PM)
The Wood Lane junction (AM) – 380 metres to the east
The Higham Roundabout (AM)‐ 1.5 kms to the east
The Long Shoot Signalised T junction (AM) – 3.5 kms to the east
The Dodwells Roundabout (AM) – 4 kms to the east
3.38 It is evident from both observation and from the results of the 2011 Baseline Nuneaton and Hinckley PARAMICS Model runs that reflect the 2011 situation, the traffic flow movements through these junctions on the A5 (T) are relatively unconstrained. This situation is clear from both the modelled average speed and delay outputs for the selected routes along the A5 (T). However, traffic flows on side roads approaching the above junctions are often quite heavy and queues form. The modelled speeds and delays that are output for routes that use these side roads support this.
3.39 The junctions on the A5 (T) further to the east (i.e. east of Dodwells) leading to the M69, and similarly the junctions to the west leading to the M42 (west of the Redgate) do not currently come under such pressure at peaks.
Personal Injury Accident Records (2005‐2010)
3.40 Personal Injury Accident (PIA) data has been obtained from the Highway Authorities in relation to the MIRA access junction and key approach routes, including the A5 (T). Over the 5‐year period [2004‐2009] there have been seven recorded PIA’s at or on approach to the existing Mira Drive junction with the A5
April 2011 ‐ 22 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
(T), all of which resulted in only slight injuries. None of the recorded incidents involved a pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist.
3.41 One of the recorded incidents was at the Mira Drive junction itself and was attributable to traffic turning into or out of the MIRA complex. Of the remaining recorded incidents the majority were attributable to either poor driving or loss of concentration / fatigue and not a consequence of deficiencies in the design of the MIRA access junction.
3.42 Table 3.1 below provides a summary of the recorded accidents at the key junctions along the A5 (T) corridor in the vicinity of the MIRA site that have occurred over the 5‐year period [2004‐2009] by severity.
Table 3.1 Recorded Accidents
Annual Junction Slight Severe Fatal Total Average A5(T) / A444 Atherstone Road (Redgate) 14 1 ‐ 15 3.0 A5(T) / A444 Weddington Road (Redgate) 6 ‐‐ 6 1.2 MIRA Drive 2 ‐‐ 2 0.4 Wood Lane 1 ‐‐ 1 0.2 Higham Lane Rbt. 3 2 ‐ 5 1.0 A5(T) / A47 Longshoot 9 ‐‐ 9 1.8 A5(T) / A47 Dodwells Data awaited
3.43 Table 3.2 provides a comparison between the average number of accidents that have occurred at each location and the expected accident rates based upon the calculations as contained within COBA ‐ Chapter 5 The Valuation of Accident at Junctions, Table 5/1 ‘Junction Accident Parameters ‐1997 Base’
Table 3.2 Accident Rates
Total Accidents Actual Annual COBA Accident Junction (2004‐2009) Average Rate A5(T) / A444 Atherstone Road (Redgate) 15 3.0 1.8 A5(T) / A444 Weddington Road (Redgate) 6 1.2 2.0 MIRA Drive 2 0.4 0.4 Wood Lane 1 0.2 1.2 Higham Lane Rbt. 5 1.0 2.2 A5(T) / A47 Longshoot 9 1.8 1.9 A5(T) / A47 Dodwells Data awaited 8.6
April 2011 ‐ 23 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3.44 From Tables 3.1 and 3.2 it can be seen that with the exception of the Redgate Junction, the recorded number of accidents at key junctions along the A5 (T) corridor in the vicinity of the MIRA site is equal to or below the expected number derived from COBA for the particular junction types.
3.45 In relation to the Redgate junction, it should be noted that the arrangements were modified a few years ago to address the high accident rate. The modifications included the reduction in the number of through lanes on the A5 (T) from two to one in each direction. In this way the traffic turning right into and from the side roads are not required to cross two traffic lanes. This measure plus the speed limit reduction to 50mph has reduced the accident rates at this location.
Provision for Walk & Cycle Access
3.46 At present, save for the section alongside the main MIRA access road, footway provision within the existing MIRA site is limited and in general terms pedestrians are required to share road space with vehicles when moving between the various buildings and functions on the site. It will be seen that as part of the MIRA Technology Park proposals a comprehensive network of footways and off‐carriageway footpaths are an integral element of the masterplan proposals.
3.47 A shared footway / cycleway is provided adjacent to the north‐eastern side of the A5 (T) Watling Street along the frontage of the MIRA site. This footway / cycleway is of a limited width, in general no more than 2.0 metres in width, however it does provide a connection to Wood Lane, Higham Lane / Nuneaton Lane and the Weddington Country Walk, the latter being an off‐carriageway Public Right of Way (PROW) that extends southwards towards Nuneaton town centre along the track bed of a former railway line.
3.48 The Weddington Country Walk also forms part of the National Cycle Network (Route 52) that extends northwards from Warwick through Coventry, Nuneaton and Coalville to link with National Route 6 just west of Loughborough. To the south of the MIRA Technology Park site NCN52 connects with the existing cycleway that runs along the Coventry Canal through the heart of Nuneaton and beyond towards Rugby and Leamington Spa as well as on‐carriageway cycleways within Nuneaton itself. To the north NCN 52 continues along quiet rural lanes connecting with the settlements of Higham‐on‐the‐Hill and Market Bosworth.
3.49 Again, facilities for cyclists within the existing MIRA site are almost non‐existent.
Public Transport
3.50 There are currently no regular commercial bus services in the immediate proximity to the MIRA Technology Park. The nearest bus stops are located on Nuneaton Lane immediately north of the A5(T) Watling Street / Higham Lane roundabout that is some 1.25 kilometres south east of the MIRA Technology Park.
3.51 A shared footway / cycleway extends along the north‐eastern side of the A5(T) between MIRA Technology Park and the bus stops that would provide a credible access route for employees and other
April 2011 ‐ 24 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
users on the site without the need to cross the A5(T). As part of the package of off‐site infrastructure improvements to be promoted through the development of the MIRA Technology Park, this footway / cycleway will be the subject of upgrading in terms of the widening together with a review of signage and lighting.
3.52 The bus stops on Nuneaton Lane are served by Centrebus Route 86 that extends from Hinckley to Nuneaton via Stoke Golding and Higham‐on‐the‐Hill. Route 86 provides an hourly frequency of service in both directions during daytime hours, Monday to Saturday. Journey time from these bus stops to Nuneaton is approximately 10 minutes and to Hinckley is approximately 20 minutes. Details of the current timetable for Route 86 are provided in Figure 3.8:
Figure 3.8 Route 86 (Hinckley – Nuneaton) – Current Timetable
April 2011 ‐ 25 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
3.53 Nuneaton Rail Station is the principal station in the vicinity of MIRA Technology Park located approximately 5.0 kilometres to the south of the site.
3.54 Nuneaton railway station is managed by the Train Operating Company, London Midland. Located on the West Coast Main Line, Nuneaton is served by an hourly Euston – Crewe London Midland semi‐fast service, which operates via Northampton and Stafford. London Midland also operate an hourly shuttle service between Nuneaton and Coventry via Bedworth. The station is well equipped with sheltered cycle storage, taxi rank, bus stop and car parking for 175 vehicles.
3.55 Peak‐time and evening service between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street also call at Nuneaton, these services being operated by Virgin Trains. Cross Country operate two trains per hour that in a westbound direction extend to Coleshill Parkway and Birmingham New Street and in an eastbound direction extend to Leicester with an hourly service to Stansted Airport. Average journey times by direct trains to popular destinations are as follows:
Destination Journey Time Destination Journey Time
Rugby ‐ 15 mins. Milton Keynes ‐ 1hr.
1hr 20 mins.(London Midland services) 40 Coventry ‐ 20 mins. Crewe ‐ mins (Virgin services, peak hours only)
Leicester ‐ 25 mins. Peterborough ‐ 1hr 25 mins.
1hr 45mins (London Midland services, via Birmingham New Street ‐ 30 mins. London Euston ‐ Northampton) 1hr (Virgin services, peak hours only.)
Stafford ‐ 35 mins. Cambridge ‐ 2hr 15mins.
Northampton ‐ 40 mins. Stansted Airport ‐ 2hr 50 mins.
Stoke ‐ 1hr.
3.56 Hinckley railway station is managed by East Midlands Trains and provides an hourly service to Leicester in an eastbound direction and Birmingham New Street in a westbound direction. During peak hours a limited number of Cross Country between Birmingham, Cambridge and Stansted Airport also call at Hinckley.
April 2011 ‐ 26 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
4. MASTERPLAN DEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED MEASURES FOR CAR AND NON CAR MODES
4.1 The proposals within the Planning application for the MIRA Masterplan that this TA supports encompass both major development, as well as the associated key infrastructure. A key aspect of infrastructure relates to those measures to accommodate car use and at the same time, those which will promote and encourage non car mode usage.
Development Proposals
4.2 Once completed the MIRA Technology Park will provide a total of around 162,000m2 GFA of floorspace comprising the following uses and areas:
Existing MIRA Uses (retained) ‐ 22,302m2
Use Class B1(b) Research & Development ‐ 118,413m2
Use Class B1(a) Offices ‐ 14,303m2
Use Class C3 Hotel ‐ 4,500m2 (100 beds)
Use Class A1 Local Retail Facilities ‐ 500m2
Use Class A3 Restaurants ‐ 1,000m2
Use Class D2 Leisure‐ 1,000 m2
4.3 A total of 24,411m2 of existing MIRA development uses will be demolished over the years and so the net increase in R+D uses will actually amount to 94,002m2.
4.4 Development of the MIRA Technology Park will be phased with the first of the new buildings being completed for occupation by the end of the year 2013 and the full development is not anticipated to be completed until the year 2021. When fully occupied the MIRA Technology Park will employ in the order of 3,000 people, creating over 2,000 jobs in addition to the 690 people who are presently employed or contracted by MIRA and associated businesses within the existing MIRA site.
4.5 Whilst development will come forward on the site as the market dictates and with no fixed timescales, for the purposes of the TA, the development impact has been assessed on the assumption that 30% of the Masterplan development will have been built out and occupied by 2015, another 30% by 2018 and 100% by 2021. In reality the building programme duration could be shorter or longer than assumed.
4.6 The basic site layout and proposed use locations are indicated in Figure 4.1 below. It should be noted that the arrangements and development within the site are indicative only.
April 2011 ‐ 27 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 4.1 MIRA Masterplan basic layout and uses
MIRA Offsite and Onsite Access and Highway Works
4.7 It is proposed that the following access measures and works to the A5(T) would be in place once the development as envisaged is fully implemented within the Masterplan Application Site:
the provision of a major 50 metre diameter roundabout on the A5(T) located where the existing Mira Drive access serving the site is located. This Roundabout would have three main arms where the widened Mira Drive would meet the A5 (T) east and westbound carriageways. A fourth minor arm to the south would tie in with the existing field road
the widening of the section of the A5 (T) to the east of the new roundabout for a distance of 260 metres to accommodate the central reserve and the necessary approach widening (westbound) and lane merge(eastbound). The measures would include appropriate embankment re‐profiling and hedge replacement where required
the widening of the section of the A5 (T) to the west of the new roundabout and south of the existing carriageway. The new cross section would include a central reserve of between 4‐8 metres in width. The existing stretch of single carriageway road would therefore be constructed to dual carriageway standard (2x 2x3.65 metre lanes) for a distance of 560 metres (i.e. to the point where it
April 2011 ‐ 28 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
would meet with the existing dualled section of A5(T) to the west). A verge and embankment (average width 5metres) would be provided to the south of the new A5 (T) carriageway.
the provision of a left in/left out only (LiLo) MIRA access arrangement with acceleration and deceleration tapers located on the A5(T) 500 metres to the west of the new MIRA access roundabout junction.
the provision of 2 bus lay‐bys on the A5(T). The first located 70 metres to the west of the main roundabout (westbound services) and the second located 75 metres east of the new roundabout (eastbound services). Informal pedestrian crossings would be provided on the roundabout islands to accommodate the generated movements.
the provision of a 2 metre verge and shared 4 metre wide pedestrian/ cycle route along the majority of the MIRA site frontage to the A5(T) with crossings provided on both the MIRA left in /left out and roundabout accesses. This facility would tie into the on‐site pedestrian /cyclist network as well as the existing and improved network that would be implemented on the north side of the A5(T) running east to the Higham Roundabout and to the west to the A444 Redgate junction.
Provision of street lighting and signing as required by the Highways Agency.
4.8 It should be noted that the works to the A5 (T) as well as the access measures are located in land that largely fall under the jurisdiction of North Warwickshire Borough Council, and therefore will be the subject of consideration the Authority. At the same time, as the works will take place to a Trunk Road then they will need to be subject to a Section 278 Agreement with the Highways Agency.
Onsite circulation, access and parking provision
4.9 In relation to onsite access and circulation, it is proposed to provide a main access road boulevard which would run northwards from the main roundabout on the A5 (T) to a point within in the site where a roundabout would be provided. From here one could either route further to the north to access what will be the new HQ building or the existing Proving Ground zone. Alternatively, one could route instead westwards along an internal link road that would provide frontage access to the development plots and which would ultimately form a roundabout with what would be the access link that would run from/to the secondary LiLo access on the A5.
4.10 This internal circulation arrangement is indicated in the Parameter Plans that accompany the Application and is highlighted below in Figure 4.2 along with the access works. It should be noted that whilst the number and points of access as indicated on the A5 are fixed, the alignments of the key internal roads within the site could shift, depending on the ultimate configuration and scale of building units that ultimately occupy the site in future.
April 2011 ‐ 29 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 4.2 MIRA A5(T) Access Proposals and main on site circulation
4.11 In relation to parking, it is proposed that the general levels of provision that are indicated below would be implemented in support of the masterplan development uses. It should be noted that the rates generally accord with the standards as required by Leicestershire County Council. It has been agreed that the parking standard for what will be the B1 (B) uses should broadly match the maximum parking demand that was observed at the current time (See Section 2) within the MIRA site. This rate corresponds to 1 space/75m2 and this compares with the normal rate (a maximum) of 1/55m2 that the County require for this type of use. It was agreed that the application of the reduced parking rate reflects the lower trip rates that were recorded on the site and which will be applied to the proposed extension to the MIRA type uses and furthermore, will assist in suppressing car borne travel demand and the goal of encouraging non car use.
4.12 The existing MIRA uses within the proving ground area currently have a provision of around 1/50m2 and as the existing parking around the buildings will remain this level of provision will remain at the 1 space/50m2 that exists today.
Parking Use Area Rate spaces Existing MIRA Uses 22,302m2 1/50m2 446 Class B1(B) Research & Development 118,413m2 1/75m2 1579 Class B1(A) Offices 14,303m2 1/30m2 477 Class C3 Hotel 4,500m2 (100 beds) 1/40m2 112 Class A1 Local Retail Facilities 500m2 1/30m2 17 Class A3 Restaurants 1,000m2 1/30m2 33 D2 Leisure 1,000m2 1/22m2 45
April 2011 ‐ 30 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
4.13 The total level of parking provision within the site including the existing MIRA uses in the Proving Ground area would amount to 2709 spaces based on the above figures. It should be noted that excluding the Proving Ground area and the existing MIRA uses, the level of parking provision associated with the new build Masterplan uses reduces to 2263 spaces.
4.14 The above total parking provision will be distributed within each development plot within the MIRA Zone, and the final numbers within each plot will depend upon the specific use and scale of building. A shared parking zone will be provided to serve the services/leisure use that is proposed to serve the zone. Figure 4.1 above illustrates the general distribution of parking within the development zone based on a simple initial concept layout. It should be note each plot and car park would be provided with its own access from the internal distributor road system.
Offsite Highway (A5) Improvement Measures
4.15 The final package of offsite high improvement measures to be implemented offsite have been devised to address the operational and capacity concerns that were highlighted within the modelling work that was undertaken using JMP and the County Councils’ Strategic PARAMICS model.
4.16 The aim of these offsite highway mitigation measures is to offset/minimise the impact of the development traffic in future years. And with the objective of achieving “nil detriment” where possible i.e. where operational conditions are no worse at peaks with development than for the situation that would otherwise prevail in the absence of the development.
4.17 The highway mitigation measures would be implemented in phases as and when certain development thresholds are exceeded within the Application Site between 2015 and 2021.
4.18 A detailed description of the modelling process and results is provided in Sections 6‐ 8 and the traffic mitigation measures are described in Section 8.5
4.19 In summary, the following offsite highway mitigation measures would be implemented in association with the MIRA Masterplan Development:
traffic flow improvement measures to the side road approaches to the Higham Roundabout some 1.2 kms to the east of the MIRA site
traffic management measures on the Wood Lane Junction on the A5(T) some 95 metres to the east of the MIRA site
traffic flow and safety improvement measures at the Long shoot signalised T junction on the A5(T) some 3.2kms to the east of the MIRA site
traffic flow and safety improvement measures at the Dodwells Roundabout on the A5(T) some 3.8kms to the east of the MIRA site
April 2011 ‐ 31 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
traffic flow and safety improvement measures at the A444 Redgate staggered T junction on the A5(T) some 720 metres to the west of the MIRA site
4.20 All of the above measures take place on the Trunk Road and will form part of a Section 278 Agreement.
Proposed MIRA Masterplan Access Measures ‐ Non Car modes
Pedestrians and Cyclists
4.21 In addition to the highway related measures, a package of other offsite measures aimed at improving access for pedestrians and cyclists off site will be implemented as development comes forward within the site. In summary these measures (that have been devised in consultation with SUSTRANS) would include:
A new pedestrian/cycle link between the east side of the MIRA site and the existing route Improvements to the ‘Weddington Country Walk’ cycleway – NCN 52 on the former railway line to the east
prolongation of existing route NCN 52 along the former railway line on the north for some 150 metres and the creation of a new connection with Wood lane
upgrading of the existing shared cycle and pedestrian route on the A5(T) north side for some 1100 metres between the MIRA site and the Higham Roundabout
upgrading of the existing shared cycle and pedestrian route on the A5(T) north side for some 700 metres between the MIRA site and the A444/Redgate Junction
upgrading of the existing shared cycle NCN 52 and pedestrian route south of the A5(T)
The upgrading of the existing NCN 52 Weddington Country Walk between MIRA Technology Park and the underpass to the West Coast Main Line (Stoney Road) to SUSTRANS specification
The construction of a new bridge over the A444 Weddington Road. Works to include a 3.0m wide footway / cycleway on bridge deck with central delineation and Improved ramp connections to A444 Weddington Road inc. widening to 3.0 metres
upgrading of the existing path between Church lane and existing railway underpass to the south and connection to the NCN 52.
4.22 It should be noted that the improvement measures that fall within the A5 Trunk Road corridor will be the subject of a Section 278 Agreement, and those associated with the existing cycle route corridor south in the direction of Nuneaton will be the subject of a Section 106 Agreement with the Planning Authority.
April 2011 ‐ 32 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
4.23 A comprehensive pedestrian and cyclist network will be implemented within the MIRA development zone that would not only link the uses within the zone with the external network, but would also link the different areas within the zone. The network would be partially segregated in places. MIRA Bike facilities will be located at key locations within the site to enable employees to cycle from one area to another without the need to use a car.
4.24 In addition, all buildings within the MIRA Technology Park will be provided with secure, covered cycle parking facilities located close to the main pedestrian entrance of the building. Cycle parking will be provided in accordance with the Leicestershire County Council standards
4.25 A more detailed description of the pedestrian/cyclist facilities is provided in Section 9 and in the Framework Travel Plan that accompanies this TA (See Appendix D)
Public Transport Measures
4.26 Bus lay‐bys and Bus stops would be implemented in association with the development. On the A5 outside the site would be constructed lay‐bys to serve both directions. Shelters, crossings and a links to the site would be provided with these facilities. It is anticipated that public services could potentially stop at these facilities.
4.27 As indicated in Section 2, under existing operating conditions the MIRA Technology Park is remote from existing commercial and subsidised bus services given its location.
4.28 Through extensive discussions with public transport officers at both Leicestershire and Warwickshire County Councils it has been agreed that the most viable option in terms of maximising the opportunities for employees and visitors to use public transport will be to promote a dedicated bus service targeted at the specific requirements of the MIRA Technology Park.
4.29 MIRABus is the concept developed to deliver public transport access to the MIRA Technology Park. MIRABus would use dedicated, branded vehicles to operate a range of demand‐responsive and timetabled services to / from MIRA Technology Park focussed on links with the two major local communities, namely Nuneaton and Hinckley, from which a significant proportion of trip using this mode would originate from.
4.30 Within the MIRAbus stops would be located at 3 locations. These facilities and services are described in more detail in Section 9 and in the Framework Travel Plan (Appendix D) that accompanies this TA.
April 2011 ‐ 33 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
5. DEVELOPMENT RELATED TRAVEL DEMAND
Traffic Generation‐Existing MIRA Uses
5.1 As indicated in Section 3 of the TA, there are existing uses that are in operation on the MIRA site which currently house around 690 employees in around 43,930m2 of building units. These activities generate traffic movements on the main access throughout the day.
5.2 As also indicated in Section 3, traffic surveys (both ATC and Classified Counts) were undertaken in February 2010, from which it was established that these uses generate the following levels of traffic flow on an hourly basis during the 3 hour AM and PM peak periods that are to be modelled (see Section 6).
Table 5.1 AM/PM Peak Traffic Flows – Existing MIRA Uses
Arrivals Departures Total Two‐Way Time Hourly Period Period Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs.
0700‐0800 0.378 166 0.032 14 0.410 180
AM Peak 0800‐0900 0.555 244 0.046 20 0.601 264
0900‐1000 0.139 61 0.032 14 0.171 75
1600‐1700 0.036 16 0.148 65 0.184 81
PM Peak 1700‐1800 0.050 22 0.462 203 0.512 225
1800‐1900 0.043 19 0.371 163 0.414 182
5.3 It should be noted that the uses not only generate car movements, but also van and truck movements, albeit in small proportions as indicated below in Table 5.2
Table 5.2 LGV/HGV movements
Car LGV HGV
87.9% 7.6% 4.5%
5.4 HGVs have been split 50:50 between OGV1 and OGV2 within the model.
Proposed Development Traffic Generation
5.5 As indicated in Section 3 of the TA, the proposed development within the site will consist of employment related uses i.e. B1 (B) R+D type uses and, to a much lesser extent, B1 (A) office type uses.
April 2011 ‐ 34 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
In addition, a small amount of service/retail/hotel and leisure uses would be implemented to serve and support these employment uses that are proposed.
5.6 Much discussion took place at the TA Scoping Stage with the HA, their advisors and the County Councils, and it was agreed that the proposed B1(B) uses could be based on the surveyed trip rates recorded from the existing MIRA site operation (back checked against TRICS person trip rate data from similar sites) and the proposed B1(A) and services/hotel uses should be based on representative TRICS Data.
5.7 At the same time it was agreed that the modelling should be based over a suitable time line from 2011 through to 2021, with intermediate years of 2015 and 2018 for evaluation and that the traffic generation should assume 30% development occupancy, then 60% occupancy and finally 100% occupancy by 2021.
5.8 Tables 5.3‐5.6 below indicate the assumed development uses and trip rates and resultant flows for each future year situation and phase of development for the three hour peak periods to be modelled.
Table 5.3 Year 2011 – Baseline 3‐hour AM & PM Peak Traffic Generation
Total Two‐Way Hourly Arrivals Departures Time Period Movements Period Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. 0700‐0800 0,378 166 0,032 14 0,410 180 AM PEAK 0800‐0900 0,555 244 0,046 20 0,601 264 0900‐1000 0,139 61 0,032 14 0,171 75 1600‐1700 0,036 16 0,148 65 0,184 81 PM PEAK 1700‐1800 0,050 22 0,462 203 0,512 225 1800‐1900 0,043 19 0,371 163 0,414 182
Table 5.4 Year 2015 – 30% Development 3‐hour AM & PM Peak Traffic Generation
Total Two‐Way Hourly Arrivals Departures Time Period Movements Period Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. 0700‐0800 0,428 206 0,051 24 0,478 230 AM PEAK 0800‐0900 0,712 342 0,076 37 0,788 379 0900‐1000 0,225 108 0,066 32 0,292 140 1600‐1700 0,074 36 0,253 122 0,327 157 PM PEAK 1700‐1800 0,081 39 0,599 288 0,680 327 1800‐1900 0,070 34 0,412 198 0,482 232
April 2011 ‐ 35 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 5.5 Year 2018 – 60% Development 3‐hour AM & PM Peak Traffic Generation
Total Two‐Way Hourly Arrivals Departures Time Period Movements Period Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. 0700‐0800 0,428 411 0,051 49 0,478 460 AM PEAK 0800‐0900 0,712 684 0,076 73 0,788 757 0900‐1000 0,225 217 0,066 64 0,292 280 1600‐1700 0,074 71 0,253 243 0,327 314 PM PEAK 1700‐1800 0,081 77 0,599 576 0,680 653 1800‐1900 0,070 67 0,412 396 0,482 463
Table 5.3 Year 2021 – 100% Development 3‐hour AM & PM Peak Traffic Generation
Total Two‐Way Arrivals Departures Time Period Hourly Movements Period Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. Trip Rate No. Vehs. 0700‐0800 0,428 685 0,051 81 0,478 766 AM PEAK 0800‐0900 0,712 1140 0,076 122 0,788 1262 0900‐1000 0,225 361 0,066 106 0,292 467 1600‐1700 0,074 119 0,253 405 0,327 524 PM PEAK 1700‐1800 0,081 129 0,599 960 0,680 1089 1800‐1900 0,070 112 0,412 660 0,482 772
5.9 It will be seen from the above tables that the peak levels of traffic generation associated with the proposed development takes place between 0800 and 0900 in the AM period and between 1700 and 1800 in the PM period. However, the impact assessments that will be undertaken using an updated Nuneaton and Hinckley Traffic Model will cover 3 hours in each period, hence the derivation of the trip rates for the 3 hour time periods.
5.10 It should be noted that within the above tables are indicated ‘MIRA uses’ with a floor area of 43,390m2. With this Masterplan development, around 24,000m2 of this existing development will ultimately be demolished and then absorbed into the new development e.g. the HQ building. For this exercise however it has been assumed that this development will stay and the ‘MIRA future growth’ figures have instead been reduced by around 24,000m2. In this way the existing development has been allowed for in the traffic generation calculations and the net increase in traffic generation accords with the net changes in uses/areas on the site.
5.11 The total traffic flow figures indicated in the above tables will not all be additional to the MIRA access and network, as for example 288 vehicle movements will already be taking place in the AM peak hour in association with the existing MIRA uses.
5.12 The traffic flows indicated in the above tables assume that all trips to the site will be made in cars and make no allowance for any future modal shift that will arise as a result of the planned bus provision, cycle improvements and proposed travel plan measures (Car share etc). As will be indicated in Section 8
April 2011 ‐ 36 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
These measures could reduce the number of employee based car trips by 20% in 2021. This in turn will reduce the traffic impact that is the subject of the modelling exercise.
Distribution of MIRA Development trips ‐ A5 (T) and Wider Area
5.13 Having derived the peak levels of MIRA development related traffic generation, it is necessary to establish the distribution of this traffic, firstly at what will be the two points of access on the A5(T) and then secondly both from and two destinations west on the A5 and east on the A5.
5.14 For this exercise it was agreed at the TA Scoping Stage that existing MIRA staff would complete a questionnaire in which they would indicate if they were a car driver, the routes they normally used to get to and from work. From this data and their residence location it was then possible to obtain a clear indication of their distribution on the highway network around the MIRA Development site.
5.15 It was also agreed at the scoping stage that the distribution of the future development traffic could be based on the results of the existing surveys.
5.16 Figures 5.1 and 5.2 below provide an indication of the distribution of existing MIRA employee vehicle routing in both the AM and PM Peaks.
Figure 5.1 Employee Routes to Work AM Peak
April 2011 ‐ 37 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 5.2 Employee Routes to Work PM Peak
5.17 It will be seen that the east /west split of MIRA traffic on the A5 access is 65%/35% in the AM peak and 62.5%/37.5% in the PM peak.
5.18 To the west, around 8% route via the A444 (north) and the remainder head in the direction of the M42 with just over 7% routing off along the way. To the east around 26% route north and south of the A5 via the Higham Roundabout, another 11% route north and south of the A5 by way of the Long shoot and Dodwells Roundabout and the remaining 20% route to/from the direction of the M69.
5.19 The basic distribution was adopted in the modelling process, but the simulation exercise assigned the development traffic on the basis of the travel time values that were adopted.
TA Study Area Boundary Definition
5.20 Much discussion took place with the HA and County Councils at the TA Scoping Stage regarding the Study Area for the TA. To assist in these discussions the results of the employee survey was again used as an initial guide to the likely area of influence of development traffic. However, at the same time it was accepted that one could only realistically establish the true area of influence or impact zone of the development once the modelling exercise had identified the links and junctions where impact was deemed to be significant.
5.21 As far as the employee survey results were concerned, a notional boundary was therefore initially drawn at the point where the percentage of total MIRA flows dropped below 5% (about 50 MIRA
April 2011 ‐ 38 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
movements with the 2021 full development on a link). This boundary is indicated above in blue in figures 5.1 and 5.2. It will be seen that the boundary it extends as far as the M69 to the east and the M42 to the west.
5.22 At the same time, the boundary line just covers the south western area of Hinckley and the north/central area of Nuneaton to the south. It should be noted that whilst the boundary was drawn where indicated, this did not mean that the development traffic impact inside this line would definitely be significant. Equally, the PARAMICS modelling work may show locations outside the notional boundary where the flow changes are significant.
5.23 The important point to highlight is that the boundary area extends beyond the Hinckley and Nuneaton Model Area and it was recognised that a separate review of impact on those junctions on the A5 further to the west than Atherstone may be required.
MIRA Development Access Traffic Distribution
5.24 As indicated in Section 3 of the TA, the proposed development will be served by two accesses in all phases from the commencement of works in 2011 through to the completed development. The development traffic will therefore be split between the two accesses, with one of these providing just limited left in /left out movements (LiLo).
5.25 The principal of providing two accesses on the A5(T) was accepted by the HA (subject to the final modelling results and a RSA), after initial impact assessments were submitted indicating that a single main access roundabout would not suffice at peaks, and that the provision of an additional left in/left out access arrangement to also serve the site would be required to provide relief without interrupting with free flow of traffic on the A5.
5.26 For the modelling exercise the percentages of MIRA trips using each of the 2 accesses/exits has been modelled as follows:
MIRA LiLo Access
Inbound: 85% of new MIRA trips travelling from the A5 West
Outbound: 30% of new MIRA trips travelling to the A5 west
Existing/New roundabout Access
Inbound: All existing trips will continue to use this access (despite origin) + 100% of new MIRA trips travelling from the East + remaining 15% of new MIRA trips travelling from the West
Outbound: All existing trips will continue to use this exit (despite destination) + 100% of new MIRA trips travelling to the West + remaining 70% of new MIRA trips travelling to the West
April 2011 ‐ 39 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
5.27 Based on the above the resultant trips were assumed to use each of the planned MIRA accesses are shown in table 5.4.
Table 5.4 MIRA Development Access Traffic Distribution
AM PM
IN OUT IN OUT
Existing/Rdbt 471 100% 48 100% 57 100% 431 100% Base/2011 LiLo n/a 0% n/a 0% n/a 0% n/a 0%
Existing/Rdbt 597 91% 84 91% 91 85% 575 95% 2015 LiLo 58 9% 8 9% 16 15% 33 5%
Existing/Rdbt 1046 80% 159 86% 165 77% 1068 88% 2018 LiLo 266 20% 26 14% 51 23% 147 12%
Existing/Rdbt 1644 75% 259 84% 263 73% 1727 85% 2021 LiLo 542 25% 49 16% 96 27% 299 15%
April 2011 ‐ 40 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6. OUTLINE OF THE APPROACH TO MODELLING FUTURE CONDITIONS FOR THE BASELINE AND WITH MIRA DEVELOPMENT (DO MINIMUM/DO SOMETHING) SCENARIOS
Background
6.1 From the outset it was recognised firstly given the overall scale of planned development and the potential significant level of traffic generation and secondly, the status and conditions of the highway network from which it would be served, that any assessment of traffic impact must be based on an area wide modelling exercise.
6.2 It was also evident that in order to establish the impact of the development traffic and to assess the effectiveness of any offsite mitigation measures, such a model should be capable of detailed micro simulation under constrained highway network conditions.
6.3 Fortunately, it was clear that the MIRA site was located within an area that has been the subject of such a modelling exercise and that a model had been set up and was jointly owned and managed by both Warwickshire County Council and Leicestershire County Council.
6.4 The PARAMICS model known as the Nuneaton and Hinckley model was originally set up in 2008 by SIAS for and covered the area indicated below in Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1 The original extent of the Nuneaton and Hinckley model
April 2011 ‐ 41 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.5 It can be seen from Figure 6.1 that the model area extended to cover the settlements of both Nuneaton and Hinckley and the section of A5 (T) between the M69 to the east and Atherstone to the west.
6.6 The model had been formed from the merger of two previous models for Hinckley and Nuneaton and was built to assess future settlement scenarios in both the AM and PM periods (3 hours per period) for the reference situation and two future situations (2016 and 2026).
6.7 However, it was clear from the outset that before the model could be used to assess the impact of the MIRA development, it would be first necessary to revisit the 2008 model and address a number of primary concerns that had been raised in relation to its operation in an independent Audit that had been undertaken by Gary Kyle Traffic Consultancy. Then, having addressed these concerns, to go on and prepare a new LMVR for the 2008 base year model and to ultimately get this signed off by all interested parties before progressing with the assessment runs for the MIRA TA.
6.8 JMP were therefore instructed by Advance Transport Consulting to undertake the exercises described above and to agree the approach and outcome of these activities with the HA and both Counties BEFORE going on to set up and run the model for both the Baseline and MIRA Do Minimum and MIRA Do something situations in future years (2015, 2018 and 2021).
6.9 An updated LMVR was circulated by JMP for review and comment to interested parties on 8th February 2011. The primary audit comments were responded to and the model was recalibrated and validated based on 10 selected routes by direction (nb the model was extended to include 3 new routes). JMP concluded that the levels of calibration and validation were to a much higher degree than was the case in previous model versions. The overall conclusion was that it was “fit for purpose“ i.e. it provided a suitable basis on which to model future MIRA development traffic demands. The report was passed to Gary Kyle Traffic Consultancy for another Audit (nb a Warwickshire CC requirement)
6.10 Having circulated the model report, detailed comments were then received and addressed in a revised LMVR that was circulated on 15th February 2011. Then on the 3 March 2011, the HA wrote and indicated that AECOM had some comments which JMP subsequently addressed.
6.11 Finally, on 21 March 2011, the HA wrote once more and indicated that from another review that had been undertaken it was evident that some issues still remained for the A5(T), with PM peak westbound flows on links around Wolvey Road, Nutts Lane and Dodwells being between 160 and 197 movements lower in the model than those actually observed. They then went on to indicate that given this situation, sensitivity tests may be required at the individual junctions in this area if capacity problems were evident from the development modelling work. The Dodwells junction was highlighted in particular as a possible case for this approach.
April 2011 ‐ 42 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Future Year Baseline Model
6.12 It had been agreed that the future impact of the MIRA Masterplan Development would be assessed for 3 future years namely 2015, 2018 and 2021 when the development would be assumed to be 30%, 60% and 100% built and occupied.
6.13 Before running the model with development scenarios it was first necessary for JMP to prepare the Baseline model runs for the 3 hour peak periods in these future years.
6.14 Accordingly, the 2008 matrices were then growthed up to derive first the 2011, then the 2015, 2018, and finally the 2021 situations. For these Baseline runs allowance was made for committed developments as well as the application of TEMPRO and NTEM factors. Importantly, factors and checks were applied to ensure that the effect of general and local development “double counting” was minimised.
6.15 The model was then run and the results then collected for the 6 peak hours for the all junctions and links within the modelled network.
6.16 The Baseline model had just included the existing MIRA traffic that was recorded on the main access ATC survey that was undertaken in February 2010. The model had also been run with the MIRA A5 access as it is currently configured ie a simple priority junction with right turn lane.
Future Year MIRA Do Minimum(DM) Model
6.17 The Do Minimum runs include the MIRA Masterplan development for each of the future years in the assumed phases i.e. 30%, 60% and 100% and also the access improvement measures that were indicated in Section 4 i.e. new LiLo Access in 2015, roundabout access in 2015 and dualling of the A5 between the two MIRA accesses in 2021. The Do Minimun runs however assumed no offsite mitigation measures to offsite junctions, or impact of modal shift due to the planned public transport or travel plan measures.
MIRA Masterplan Traffic Generation:
6.18 The additional trip generation for the modelling exercise for the MIRA development is based precisely on the traffic flow levels that were indicated in Section 5 of this TA:
6.19 Across the 3 AM and PM peak hours these flows were:
April 2011 ‐ 43 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
AM PM
IN OUT IN OUT
Base 471 48 57 431
2015 656 93 108 608
2018 1312 185 215 1215
2021 2186 308 359 2026
6.20 The phasing of trips across the 3 future years was based on the following proportions: 30% of the total development demand by 2015, 60% by 2018, and 100% by 2021 assumption.)
6.21 The modelled arrival and departure profiles of these trips across the 3 hours within the model is based on the profiling exhibited in the MIRA survey counts (CTCs 25/02/2010). Summation of the in and out trips at the existing access and deriving the proportions for each 15 minutes produced the following:.
AM PM
TIME TIME IN OUT IN OUT PERIOD PERIOD
07:00 5% 4% 16:00 10% 7%
07:15 8% 8% 16:15 5% 15%
07:30 11% 10% 16:30 0% 11%
07:45 17% 0% 16:45 12% 8%
08:00 12% 12% 17:00 7% 12%
08:15 10% 4% 17:15 7% 14%
08:30 11% 6% 17:30 2% 10%
08:45 11% 4% 17:45 10% 7%
09:00 5% 18% 18:00 7% 6%
09:15 4% 12% 18:15 12% 4%
09:30 3% 12% 18:30 21% 3%
09:45 3% 8% 18:45 7% 4%
April 2011 ‐ 44 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.22 The vehicle proportions attributed to the additional MIRA trips has been based on the vehicle type proportions observed in the Classified Turning count surveys across the 6 modelled hours (inbound + outbound counts). HGVs have been split 50:50 between OGV1 and OGV2 within the model.
Car LGV HGV
87.9% 7.6% 4.5%
Access Measures and Access Usage:
6.23 For their modelling exercise JMP were provided with the basic access designs for the 3 phases indicated above and described in Section 3. The percentages of MIRA trips using each of the 2 accesses/exits has been modelled as follows:
LiLo
Inbound ‐ 85% of new MIRA trips travelling from the A5 West
Outbound ‐ 30% of new MIRA trips travelling to the A5 west
Existing/New roundabout
Inbound – All existing trips will continue to use this access (despite origin) + 100% of new MIRA trips travelling from the East + remaining 15% of new MIRA trips travelling from the West
Outbound – All existing trips will continue to use this exit (despite destination) + 100% of new MIRA trips travelling to the West + remaining 70% of new MIRA trips travelling to the West
6.24 Based on the above the resultant trips were assumed to use each of the planned MIRA accesses:
April 2011 ‐ 45 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
AM PM
IN OUT IN OUT
Existing/Rdbt 471 100% 48 100% 57 100% 431 100% Base/2011 LiLo n/a 0% n/a 0% n/a 0% n/a 0%
Existing/Rdbt 597 91% 84 91% 91 85% 575 95% 2015 LiLo 58 9% 8 9% 16 15% 33 5%
Existing/Rdbt 1046 80% 159 86% 165 77% 1068 88% 2018 LiLo 266 20% 26 14% 51 23% 147 12%
Existing/Rdbt 1644 75% 259 84% 263 73% 1727 85% 2021 LiLo 542 25% 49 16% 96 27% 299 15%
6.25 The use of each access was controlled by developing two different matrix levels within the model (Level 13 & 14) which constrain the trips using each exit i.e. Level 13 trips only use the existing/rdbt access and level 14 the LiLo. Link restrictions have then been used on the access/exit links at each junction to limit the use to only those vehicles from the relevant matrix level.
MIRA Vehicle Trip Distribution:
6.26 As agreed with both the HA and the two Counties (see Section 5) the MIRA vehicle trips (both new and existing) have been distributed in accordance with survey of the journeys to/from work by existing MIRA staff . Proportions have been assigned to the relevant zones in the PARAMICS model to ensure that the correct level of MIRA trips will travel to/from the correct direction.
6.27 Routing between zones and MIRA site is then determined though dynamic assignment and cost calculations (indeed as with all other trips in the model). The following table presents the proportions which are then applied to the trip generation (inbound & outbound) to determine the Origins and Destinations of the trips on a zonal basis.
April 2011 ‐ 46 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
ZONE AM % PM % ZONE AM % PM % ZONE AM % PM %
1 2.15 2.91 48 0.19 0.20 134 1.02 0.87
7 0.65 0.81 49 0.49 0.51 136 0.57 0.80
8 0.65 0.81 50 21.78 21.63 137 0.57 0.80
11 2.66 1.89 53 8.18 8.24 139 0.57 0.80
13 6.05 6.52 55 3.68 3.30 140 0.57 0.80
21 1.84 0.87 57 2.66 1.89 145 0.57 0.80
24 0.65 0.81 58 0.61 0.87 146 0.57 0.80
29 1.72 2.31 59 2.56 0.68 155 0.43 0.41
31 0.92 1.77 60 1.26 1.32 156 0.43 0.41
32 0.92 1.77 108 0.61 0.58 157 0.43 0.41
33 0.69 1.32 110 0.61 0.58 159 0.43 0.41
34 0.69 1.32 114 0.61 0.58 160 0.43 0.41
35 0.69 1.32 115 0.61 0.58 171 4.03 1.31
36 0.23 0.44 119 1.02 0.87 173 1.23 1.45
39 0.46 0.88 126 0.97 0.92 175 2.15 2.33
40 0.15 0.29 128 0.49 0.46 178 10.33 9.80
41 0.15 0.29 130 0.49 0.46 180 6.24 5.63
43 0.31 0.87 132 1.02 0.87 TOTAL 100 100
Future Year MIRA Do Something (DS) Model
6.28 Once the Do minimum model runs were completed then it would be possible to undertake a comparative analysis between the MIRA Do Minimum runs and the corresponding Baseline Runs. From these results it would then be possible to identify where operational constraints and problems exist on the modelled network and those routes and junctions where conditions materially deteriorate as a consequence of the additional traffic movements that are generated by the MIRA Masterplan development.
April 2011 ‐ 47 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.29 Having identified where these network constraints exist and where conditions materially deteriorate, it is then necessary to devise and test the effectiveness of any mitigation measures that are designed to address the situation in what will be referred to as Do Something model runs. The process could be iterative in that the aim of the exercise is to achieve a “nil detriment“ impact in relation to the additional MIRA traffic flows i.e. conditions with the MIRA development on the network are no worse than would otherwise prevail without the development in the future years. Given this situation, it might therefore be necessary to refine and further test the mitigation measures in order to optimise the results.
6.30 The results of this Do Something modelling exercise and the comparison of these with both the Baseline and Do Minimum MIRA runs are reviewed in detail in Section 8 of the TA.
Baseline Modelling Results and Analysis
6.31 Having obtained confirmation from interested parties regarding the updating exercise in relation to the Hinckley and Nuneaton Model, JMP then set up and ran the initial 2011 Reference model. Subsequent to this, they then set up and ran the Baseline Models for the 2015, 2018 and 2021 situations, against which the situations with the MIRA development would then be run and compared.
6.32 The results of this baseline modelling exercise are summarised in the spreadsheet data that is to be found for ease of reference in Appendix E that is included within this TA. It will be noted that this spreadsheet data also includes the model run results for the MIRA development runs (Do minimum and Do Something first with just Traffic Mitigation and then also with sustainable transport measures) and which will be reviewed in subsequent sections of this TA.
6.33 It will be seen that this Appendix E spreadsheet data provides baseline model information for the 2011, 2015, 2018 and 2021 situations on the following:
traffic flows by direction and in total on the main roads within the model network for each of the AM and PM peak 3 hour periods
average speeds on links by direction and two way on all roads within the model network for each of the AM and PM peak 3 hour periods
flows on all main junctions within the model network for each of the AM and PM peak 3 hour periods
average queues per lane on all main junctions within the model network for each of the AM and PM peak 3 hour periods
journey times on the 10 selected routes (and individual sections) through the model network area for each of the AM and PM peak 3 hour periods
Traffic Flows
April 2011 ‐ 48 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.34 The model indicated the following two way flows on key links during the critical AM and PM peak hours in the AM and PM peak periods:
AM PM Link Link Name 20112015 2018 2021 2011 2015 2018 2021 Ref. Ref Ref Diff. Ref Diff. Ref Diff. Ref Ref Diff. Ref Diff. Ref Diff. 1A444 Roanne Ringway (s of Queens Rd) 1638 1686 2,9% 1734 5,8% 1707 4,2% 1734 1820 4,9% 1850 6,7% 1856 7,0%
2A444 Vicarage Street (w of Coton Rd) 2053 2033 ‐1,0% 2016 ‐1,8% 1997 ‐2,7% 1892 1881 ‐0,6% 1829 ‐3,3% 1709 ‐9,7% 3A444 Newtown Road (w of Corporation St) 1510 1562 3,5% 1582 4,7% 1556 3,0% 1752 1847 5,4% 1894 8,1% 1928 10,0% 4A444 Leicester Road 1540 1581 2,6% 1585 2,9% 1577 2,4% 1394 1427 2,4% 1384 ‐0,7% 1356 ‐2,7% 5Weddington Road (s of Old Hinckley Road) 1154 1174 1,8% 1163 0,8% 1150 ‐0,3% 1704 1725 1,3% 1720 1,0% 1680 ‐1,4%
6Old Hinckley Road (w of Saints Way) 1413 1450 2,6% 1485 5,1% 1469 3,9% 1395 1410 1,1% 1405 0,7% 1388 ‐0,5% 7Weddington Road (s of Shanklin Dr) 1366 1398 2,3% 1405 2,9% 1428 4,6% 1556 1587 2,0% 1604 3,1% 1618 4,0% 8 Hinckley Road (e of Eastborough Way) 1166 1186 1,7% 1174 0,7% 1160 ‐0,6% 1336 1352 1,2% 1308 ‐2,1% 1321 ‐1,2% 9Eastborough Way 2117 2173 2,6% 2201 3,9% 2227 5,2% 2096 2206 5,3% 2275 8,5% 2320 10,7%
10 Midland Road 1350 1444 6,9% 1503 11,4% 1522 12,8% 1591 1686 6,0% 1729 8,7% 1733 9,0% 11 B4111 (Nuneaton Road) 645 659 2,1% 676 4,8% 684 6,0% 657 692 5,3% 693 5,5% 689 4,9% 12 A5 (Witherley Road) 2520 2554 1,4% 2601 3,2% 2657 5,5% 2416 2436 0,8% 2457 1,7% 2483 2,8% 13 A5 (Witherley Road) 2144 2148 0,2% 2173 1,4% 2215 3,3% 2064 2100 1,7% 2153 4,3% 2208 7,0%
14 A444 (Weddington Lane) 859 903 5,1% 927 7,9% 963 12,1% 785 832 6,1% 879 12,0% 912 16,2% 15 Higham Lane 781 816 4,5% 838 7,2% 817 4,6% 743 753 1,4% 778 4,7% 761 2,4% 16 A5 (Watling Street) 1696 1700 0,2% 1719 1,3% 1749 3,1% 1693 1721 1,7% 1758 3,9% 1750 3,4% 17 A47 (Long Shoot) 1748 1765 1,0% 1750 0,1% 1738 ‐0,6% 1793 1813 1,1% 1815 1,2% 1759 ‐1,9% 18 A5 (Watling Street) 1639 1488 ‐9,2% 1439 ‐12,2% 1546 ‐5,7% 1588 1511 ‐4,9% 1589 0,0% 1448 ‐8,8%
19 A5 (Watling Street) 2158 2086 ‐3,3% 2079 ‐3,6% 2127 ‐1,4% 2142 2078 ‐3,0% 2130 ‐0,6% 1988 ‐7,2% 20 A5 (Watling Street) 1332 1331 ‐0,1% 1345 1,0% 1370 2,9% 1528 1481 ‐3,1% 1495 ‐2,1% 1437 ‐6,0% 21 B4114 (Coventry Road) 645 654 1,4% 663 2,7% 693 7,3% 854 850 ‐0,5% 876 2,6% 880 3,0% 22 M69 4677 4731 1,2% 4900 4,8% 5095 8,9% 4580 4568 ‐0,3% 4775 4,3% 4879 6,5%
23 B4114 (Coventry Road) 551 559 1,3% 568 3,1% 591 7,1% 724 722 ‐0,3% 733 1,1% 745 2,9% 24 B581 (Broughton Road) 617 641 3,8% 644 4,4% 643 4,3% 443 456 2,8% 459 3,6% 467 5,4% 24 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 575 574 ‐0,2% 580 1,0% 589 2,5% 623 610 ‐2,1% 600 ‐3,7% 614 ‐1,4% 26 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 1112 1118 0,6% 1140 2,5% 1129 1,5% 1208 1227 1,6% 1216 0,7% 1211 0,3%
27 B581 (Stanton Road) 991 1017 2,6% 1018 2,8% 1026 3,5% 984 1035 5,2% 1058 7,6% 1097 11,5% 28 Carrs Hill 687 727 5,8% 742 8,1% 788 14,8% 832 849 2,0% 869 4,4% 896 7,6% 29 Heath Lane 172 180 4,2% 184 6,8% 197 14,5% 188 201 7,2% 210 11,8% 222 18,2% 30 A447 (Ashby Road) 921 943 2,4% 936 1,7% 935 1,5% 895 926 3,4% 926 3,5% 933 4,2%
31 A47 (Normandy Way) 1360 1367 0,5% 1373 1,0% 1413 3,9% 1429 1474 3,1% 1491 4,3% 1535 7,4% 32 B4668 (Leicester Road) 1245 1325 6,4% 1421 14,1% 1544 24,0% 1227 1286 4,9% 1317 7,4% 1384 12,9% 33 Butt Lane 211 218 3,4% 223 5,9% 239 13,4% 187 199 6,5% 198 5,9% 202 7,9% 34 B4667 (Ashby Road) 791 845 6,8% 857 8,3% 877 10,8% 955 1005 5,3% 1025 7,4% 1056 10,6% 35 A47 (Normandy Way) 1934 1983 2,5% 2015 4,2% 2058 6,4% 1901 1977 4,0% 2002 5,3% 2058 8,3%
36 A47 (Normandy Way) 1664 1688 1,4% 1724 3,6% 1768 6,3% 1950 1999 2,5% 2022 3,7% 2043 4,8% 37 Hollycroft 754 843 11,8% 876 16,1% 909 20,4% 885 926 4,7% 963 8,8% 1007 13,8% 38 B590 (Leicester Road) 677 722 6,6% 750 10,7% 773 14,2% 766 781 2,0% 855 11,5% 882 15,0% 39 B590 (London Road) 1386 1410 1,8% 1433 3,4% 1438 3,7% 1398 1471 5,2% 1507 7,8% 1530 9,4%
40 B4669 (Burbage Road) 1465 1491 1,8% 1514 3,4% 1507 2,8% 1454 1439 ‐1,0% 1465 0,7% 1413 ‐2,8% 41 B590 (Southfield Road) 554 562 1,4% 554 0,0% 525 ‐5,1% 497 494 ‐0,5% 476 ‐4,2% 478 ‐3,7% 42 Brookside 214 222 3,3% 230 7,2% 238 11,1% 201 231 14,9% 252 25,4% 274 36,7% 43 Rugby Road 1658 1786 7,7% 1793 8,1% 1802 8,7% 1791 1917 7,0% 1935 8,0% 1957 9,2%
44 Rugby Road 830 868 4,6% 898 8,2% 889 7,2% 963 1026 6,6% 1046 8,7% 1077 11,9% 45 Trinity Lane 821 863 5,1% 919 12,0% 921 12,2% 984 1092 10,9% 1114 13,2% 1148 16,7% 46 Mount Road 333 381 14,6% 407 22,4% 433 30,1% 428 490 14,4% 506 18,1% 514 20,0% 47 Trinity Lane 1204 1331 10,6% 1386 15,2% 1390 15,5% 1443 1556 7,8% 1570 8,7% 1601 10,9%
48 B4666 (Coventry Road) 761 863 13,4% 890 16,9% 933 22,6% 942 1020 8,2% 980 4,0% 1033 9,6% 49 Westfield Road 422 480 13,6% 483 14,4% 480 13,7% 445 652 46,5% 709 59,3% 700 57,3% 50 B4666 (Coventry Road) 1342 1440 7,3% 1401 4,4% 1344 0,1% 1472 1587 7,8% 1465 ‐0,5% 1516 3,0%
April 2011 ‐ 49 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.35 It will be seen from the above table that traffic growth varied markedly between different links on the network between 2011 and 2021. On the A5 the growth rates over this time in some locations were negative and in others up to 5%. The growth rates on the remaining network links around Nuneaton and Hinckley experienced more significant growth rates that in some places exceed 20%.
Junction Operation
6.36 A total of 44 junctions are included within the Nuneaton and Hinckley traffic model, with 13 of these located on the A5 (T) and the remainder within the Hinckley, Nuneaton and Atherstone areas.
6.37 The modelled results for the 2011 situation indicated that the following junctions experienced some queue problems during the AM peak hour in particular:
Higham Roundabout
Wood Lane
Longshoot (A5 east arm)
Dodwells (A5 east and Coventry Road arms)
6.38 The subsequent Model Runs then indicated a general worsening in queue conditions in 2015‐2021 at the same junctions in both the AM and PM peak hours as well as on the Wood Lane junction to the east of the MIRA site and also at the Redgate/A444 South junction. The worsening peak period situation at the Dodwells was also forcing traffic to use the route to/from the A5 to the east by way of Nutts Lane and its junction on the A5.
Delays on Selected Routes within the modelled network.
6.39 For the modelling exercise a total of 10 routes were identified within the modelled network. These routes were in turn broken down into individual 2‐3 sections, with delays recorded on each by direction for each of the 6 modelled hours. The results of this are indicated in the data that is included in Appendix E.
6.40 The results indicate a gradual increase in delays experienced on all of the routes between 2011 and 2021 as traffic flows built up within the network. The increase in delays varied significantly, depending upon the route and which peak is selected.
6.41 For example, on the Hinckley Routes (5) the average delays increased by between 4% and 20% depending on the section and direction between 2011 and 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 50 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
6.42 On the A5 Routes (2) the average delays increased by between 1.5 % and 7.5% depending on the section and direction between 2011 and 2021.
6.43 On the Nuneaton Routes (3) the average delays increased by between 1.2% and 19% depending on the section and direction between 2011 and 2021.
6.44 It was evident that the delays primarily arose due to the increased traffic demand and capacity constraints at the critical junctions.
Average peak network speeds (Baseline)
6.45 The model results indicated that the average two way speeds are stable or slightly reduce on key links in future years (2015‐2021:
A5 east of the Redgate /A444 junction 55mph/55mph
A5 in the vicinity of the Higham Roundabout 40 mph/39mph
A5 east of the Dodwells junction 12 mph/9mph
A47 Longshoot 24mph/21mph
6.46 It can be seen that the speeds on the eastern section of the A5 deteriorated more markedly as a consequence mainly of the operation of the Dodwells, Long Shoot, Higham roundabout and Wood Lane junctions.
April 2011 ‐ 51 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
7. MIRA DO MINIMUM MODELLING RESULTS AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH BASELINE RUNS
7.1 During this stage of the exercise JMP ran the Nuneaton and Hinckley Model for the future situations i.e. 2015, 2018 and 2021 with the corresponding 30%, 60% and 100% MIRA development assumptions.
7.2 As for the Baseline situations, the model results included the peak traffic flows and speeds on selected links, junction flows and queues, and delays on the 10 routes and sections within the modelled network.
7.3 The overall purpose of the exercise was to establish the impact of the additional MIRA development traffic on the modelled network operation, and to then compare this with the corresponding Baseline situations. In this way one could identify to what extent the development traffic will exacerbate an existing problem, or create an additional problem.
7.4 Having undertaken a comparative analysis between the MIRA Do Minimum runs and the Baseline runs, one can then go on to identify what mitigation measures may be required to offset the impact of the development traffic.
7.5 For this exercise it was assumed that the MIRA development would be served by the proposed new access phasing i.e. left in /left out access + existing T junction‐2015, Lilo + Rdbt access ‐ 2018 and LiLo+Rdbt+dualling A5 in 2021
April 2011 ‐ 52 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Summary of MIRA Do Minimum Modelling Results and comparison with the corresponding baseline model runs
AM PM Link Link Name 20112015 2018 2021 2011 2015 2018 2021 Ref. Ref Ref Do Min. Diff. Ref Do Min. Diff. Ref Do Min. Diff. Ref Ref Do Min. Diff. Ref Do Min. Diff. Ref Do Min. Diff.
1 A444 Roanne Ringway (s of Queens Rd) 1638 1686 1690 0,2% 1734 1711 ‐1,3% 1707 1842 7,9% 1734 1820 1797 ‐1,3% 1850 1863 0,7% 1856 1847 ‐0,5% 2 A444 Vicarage Street (w of Coton Rd) 2053 2033 2052 0,9% 2016 2007 ‐0,5% 1997 1960 ‐1,9% 1892 1881 1826 ‐3,0% 1829 1784 ‐2,4% 1709 1679 ‐1,7% 3 A444 Newtown Road (w of Corporation St) 1510 1562 1565 0,2% 1582 1566 ‐1,0% 1556 1587 2,0% 1752 1847 1865 1,0% 1894 1926 1,7% 1928 1925 ‐0,2% 4 A444 Leicester Road 1540 1581 1591 0,6% 1585 1608 1,5% 1577 1609 2,0% 1394 1427 1430 0,2% 1384 1452 4,9% 1356 1347 ‐0,7%
5 Weddington Road (s of Old Hinckley Road) 1154 1174 1206 2,8% 1163 1201 3,3% 1150 1159 0,7% 1704 1725 1694 ‐1,8% 1720 1752 1,9% 1680 1612 ‐4,0% 6Old Hinckley Road (w of Saints Way) 1413 1450 1456 0,4% 1485 1512 1,8% 1469 1527 4,0% 1395 1410 1385 ‐1,8% 1405 1478 5,1% 1388 1362 ‐1,9% 7 Weddington Road (s of Shanklin Dr) 1366 1398 1418 1,4% 1405 1490 6,0% 1428 1448 1,4% 1556 1587 1604 1,1% 1604 1668 4,0% 1618 1586 ‐2,0% 8 Hinckley Road (e of Eastborough Way) 1166 1186 1179 ‐0,6% 1174 1215 3,5% 1160 1221 5,3% 1336 1352 1338 ‐1,0% 1308 1342 2,6% 1321 1331 0,8% 9 Eastborough Way 2117 2173 2160 ‐0,6% 2201 2190 ‐0,5% 2227 2149 ‐3,5% 2096 2206 2229 1,0% 2275 2261 ‐0,6% 2320 2393 3,2%
10 Midland Road 1350 1444 1452 0,6% 1503 1521 1,2% 1522 1636 7,5% 1591 1686 1666 ‐1,2% 1729 1740 0,6% 1733 1743 0,6% 11 B4111 (Nuneaton Road) 645 659 681 3,4% 676 716 6,0% 684 777 13,6% 657 692 682 ‐1,4% 693 670 ‐3,3% 689 727 5,5% 12 A5 (Witherley Road) 2520 2554 2560 0,2% 2601 2644 1,7% 2657 2638 ‐0,7% 2416 2436 2473 1,5% 2457 2519 2,5% 2483 2616 5,4% 13 A5 (Witherley Road) 2144 2148 2175 1,3% 2173 2221 2,2% 2215 2265 2,2% 2064 2100 2165 3,1% 2153 2026 ‐5,9% 2208 2438 10,4%
14 A444 (Weddington Lane) 859 903 927 2,6% 927 1051 13,4% 963 1007 4,6% 785 832 881 5,9% 879 988 12,4% 912 942 3,3% 15 Higham Lane 781 816 822 0,7% 838 769 ‐8,2% 817 668 ‐18,3% 743 753 772 2,5% 778 911 17,1% 761 783 2,9% 16 A5 (Watling Street) 1696 1700 1716 1,0% 1719 1715 ‐0,2% 1749 1798 2,8% 1693 1721 1783 3,6% 1758 1789 1,7% 1750 1997 14,1% 17 A47 (Long Shoot) 1748 1765 1738 ‐1,5% 1750 1689 ‐3,5% 1738 1743 0,3% 1793 1813 1810 ‐0,2% 1815 1791 ‐1,3% 1759 1823 3,7%
18 A5 (Watling Street) 1639 1488 1500 0,8% 1439 1451 0,8% 1546 1389 ‐10,2% 1588 1511 1558 3,1% 1589 1490 ‐6,2% 1448 1546 6,8% 19 A5 (Watling Street) 2158 2086 2082 ‐0,2% 2079 2038 ‐2,0% 2127 1959 ‐7,9% 2142 2078 2125 2,3% 2130 2066 ‐3,0% 1988 2043 2,8% 20 A5 (Watling Street) 1332 1331 1334 0,2% 1345 1371 2,0% 1370 1382 0,9% 1528 1481 1501 1,3% 1495 1489 ‐0,4% 1437 1481 3,1% 21 B4114 (Coventry Road) 645 654 652 ‐0,4% 663 664 0,2% 693 675 ‐2,6% 854 850 847 ‐0,3% 876 867 ‐1,0% 880 859 ‐2,5% 22 M69 4677 4731 4711 ‐0,4% 4900 4873 ‐0,6% 5095 5054 ‐0,8% 4580 4568 4604 0,8% 4775 4749 ‐0,6% 4879 4864 ‐0,3%
23 B4114 (Coventry Road) 551 559 555 ‐0,6% 568 567 ‐0,2% 591 590 ‐0,2% 724 722 718 ‐0,6% 733 730 ‐0,4% 745 749 0,6% 24 B581 (Broughton Road) 617 641 643 0,4% 644 654 1,6% 643 667 3,7% 443 456 462 1,3% 459 463 0,8% 467 461 ‐1,3% 24 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 575 574 578 0,6% 580 574 ‐1,0% 589 572 ‐3,0% 623 610 599 ‐1,8% 600 600 0,0% 614 608 ‐1,0% 26 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 1112 1118 1132 1,2% 1140 1153 1,1% 1129 1176 4,2% 1208 1227 1213 ‐1,1% 1216 1215 ‐0,1% 1211 1234 1,9%
27 B581 (Stanton Road) 991 1017 1013 ‐0,4% 1018 1039 2,0% 1026 1072 4,5% 984 1035 1034 ‐0,1% 1058 1072 1,4% 1097 1084 ‐1,2% 28 Carrs Hill 687 727 719 ‐1,1% 742 750 1,0% 788 796 1,0% 832 849 863 1,7% 869 868 ‐0,2% 896 900 0,5% 29 Heath Lane 172 180 173 ‐3,6% 184 189 2,9% 197 205 4,1% 188 201 197 ‐1,9% 210 205 ‐2,4% 222 224 0,9% 30 A447 (Ashby Road) 921 943 944 0,1% 936 945 0,9% 935 925 ‐1,0% 895 926 912 ‐1,5% 926 924 ‐0,3% 933 939 0,7% 31 A47 (Normandy Way) 1360 1367 1356 ‐0,8% 1373 1378 0,4% 1413 1371 ‐3,0% 1429 1474 1476 0,2% 1491 1493 0,2% 1535 1534 0,0%
32 B4668 (Leicester Road) 1245 1325 1330 0,4% 1421 1420 ‐0,1% 1544 1606 4,0% 1227 1286 1279 ‐0,6% 1317 1330 1,0% 1384 1392 0,5% 33 Butt Lane 211 218 218 ‐0,1% 223 232 4,1% 239 240 0,3% 187 199 192 ‐3,7% 198 198 0,1% 202 204 1,0% 34 B4667 (Ashby Road) 791 845 835 ‐1,1% 857 857 0,0% 877 897 2,3% 955 1005 987 ‐1,9% 1025 1047 2,1% 1056 1043 ‐1,3% 35 A47 (Normandy Way) 1934 1983 1986 0,2% 2015 2023 0,4% 2058 2057 0,0% 1901 1977 1976 ‐0,1% 2002 2010 0,4% 2058 2070 0,6%
36 A47 (Normandy Way) 1664 1688 1700 0,7% 1724 1734 0,6% 1768 1784 0,9% 1950 1999 2016 0,9% 2022 1993 ‐1,5% 2043 2051 0,4% 37 Hollycroft 754 843 854 1,3% 876 924 5,6% 909 1076 18,4% 885 926 937 1,1% 963 994 3,2% 1007 998 ‐0,9% 38 B590 (Leicester Road) 677 722 723 0,2% 750 765 2,1% 773 783 1,2% 766 781 809 3,6% 855 858 0,4% 882 872 ‐1,1% 39 B590 (London Road) 1386 1410 1401 ‐0,6% 1433 1403 ‐2,1% 1438 1491 3,7% 1398 1471 1459 ‐0,8% 1507 1515 0,5% 1530 1543 0,9% 40 B4669 (Burbage Road) 1465 1491 1488 ‐0,2% 1514 1490 ‐1,6% 1507 1517 0,7% 1454 1439 1447 0,6% 1465 1441 ‐1,6% 1413 1455 3,0%
41 B590 (Southfield Road) 554 562 557 ‐0,7% 554 542 ‐2,1% 525 550 4,7% 497 494 483 ‐2,2% 476 485 1,9% 478 469 ‐2,0% 42 Brookside 214 222 232 4,7% 230 229 ‐0,3% 238 226 ‐5,2% 201 231 232 0,4% 252 260 3,3% 274 274 ‐0,1% 43 Rugby Road 1658 1786 1783 ‐0,2% 1793 1848 3,1% 1802 1893 5,1% 1791 1917 1914 ‐0,1% 1935 1937 0,1% 1957 1951 ‐0,3% 44 Rugby Road 830 868 901 3,7% 898 890 ‐0,9% 889 952 7,0% 963 1026 1000 ‐2,6% 1046 1015 ‐2,9% 1077 1068 ‐0,9%
45 Trinity Lane 821 863 885 2,6% 919 913 ‐0,7% 921 983 6,7% 984 1092 1073 ‐1,7% 1114 1110 ‐0,4% 1148 1156 0,7% 46 Mount Road 333 381 379 ‐0,5% 407 408 0,2% 433 447 3,4% 428 490 481 ‐1,8% 506 504 ‐0,5% 514 524 1,9% 47 Trinity Lane 1204 1331 1341 0,7% 1386 1376 ‐0,7% 1390 1461 5,1% 1443 1556 1562 0,4% 1570 1583 0,8% 1601 1592 ‐0,6% 48 B4666 (Coventry Road) 761 863 847 ‐1,9% 890 879 ‐1,2% 933 928 ‐0,5% 942 1020 1045 2,5% 980 1019 3,9% 1033 1002 ‐3,0% 49 Westfield Road 422 480 488 1,7% 483 501 3,7% 480 600 25,0% 445 652 608 ‐6,7% 709 711 0,4% 700 725 3,6% 50 B4666 (Coventry Road) 1342 1440 1390 ‐3,4% 1401 1376 ‐1,8% 1344 1347 0,2% 1472 1587 1556 ‐1,9% 1465 1510 3,1% 1516 1514 ‐0,1%
April 2011 ‐ 53 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
7.6 It can be seen from the above table that the model results indicated a range of percentage flow changes (both pluses and minuses) when the Do Minimum situation was compared with the corresponding baseline or reference situations.
7.7 In the 2015 situations the AM peak flow changes with development ranged between ‐3.6% and +4.7%. In 2018 the flow changes ranged between ‐8% and +6% and in 2021 the flow changes ranged between ‐ 18% and +25 %. On the A5 with full development in 2021 assumed the flow changes ranged between ‐ 7.9% and +2.8% in the AM peak.
7.8 It was clear that some of the most significant changes took place on more minor roads and reflect the model workings rather than the impact of the MIRA development. For example the 25% increase in flow on one particular link with development took place in 2021, whereas in 2018 when a similar level of additional development traffic was generated the increase was just 3.7%.
Junction operation
7.9 The model output generated the average maximum queues at all the junctions within the modelled network throughout the modelled periods. To assist in assessing the impact of the increasing levels of MIRA development traffic in future years when general traffic is also growing on the network a comparison was also made of the the changes in queue length at the main junctions of concern.
7.10 Taking each of these junctions in turn the results were as follows.
April 2011 ‐ 54 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.1 and 7.2 A444/A5 Redgate West junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 10 9 5 2015 Do Min 12 13 6 2018 Ref 11 13 5 2018 Do Min 37 20 8 2021 Ref 14 12 6 2021 Do Min 47 20 8
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 6 8 4 2015 Do Min 7 10 4 2018 Ref 7 11 4 2018 Do Min 14 10 5 2021 Ref 7 10 5 2021 Do Min 15 14 4
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.11 It will be seen from tables 7.1 and 7.2 above that peak queue conditions at the Atherstone Drive element of this staggered T junction marginally deteriorate in the 2015 peaks with the development (between 1‐3 additional vehicles). However conditions then worsen markedly on the A4444 approach and also on the Eastern arm of the A5 in the AM peak in 2018 assuming the 60% development occupation. By this time queues increase by as much as 16 vehicles on the A444 and by 7 vehicles on the A5 East. The conditions then marginally deteriorate further in 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 55 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.3 and 7.4 A444/A5 Redgate East junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) 2015 Ref 2 5 5 2015 Do Min 5 14 7 2018 Ref 3 6 8 2018 Do Min 17 37 9 2021 Ref 4 7 7 2021 Do Min 21 63 9
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) 2015 Ref 4 10 3 2015 Do Min 4 14 3 2018 Ref 5 11 3 2018 Do Min 1 9 4 2021 Ref 4 12 3 2021 Do Min 5 24 4
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.12 It will be seen from tables 7.3 and 7.4 above that peak queue conditions at the Weddington Lane element of this staggered T junction again marginally deteriorate in the 2015 peaks with the development (between 0‐9 additional vehicles). However conditions then worsen markedly on the A444 Weddington Lane approach and also on the Eastern arm of the A5 in the AM peak in 2018 assuming the 60% development occupation. By this time queues increase by as much as 31 vehicles on the A444 and by 14 vehicles on the A5 East. The conditions then marginally deteriorate further in 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 56 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.5 and 7.6 MIRA Access junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref292 2015 Do Min 2 14 2 2018 Ref292 2018 Do Min 2 12 9 2021 Ref 2 10 2 2021 Do Min 2 3 28
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 11 2 1 2015 Do Min 13 2 2 2018 Ref 11 2 2 2018 Do Min 5 36 5 2021 Ref 18 2 2 2021 Do Min 23 4 4
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.13 It will be seen from tables 7.5 and 7.6 above that peak queue conditions at the MIRA access are broadly the same with the first phase of development in 2015 as with the situation without the development. This is not surprising as the LiLo access would be implemented in this phase and this takes pressure off the main access which remains with the same configuration as today at this time.
7.14 In 2018, conditions on the eastern arm of the A5 (T) further deteriorate in the PM peak with the development (up to 32 additional vehicles). However, it will be seen that conditions improve markedly in 2021 at the junction, despite the increase in development traffic. This arises as a consequence of the proposal by this time to implement the dualling between the two MIRA access junctions.
7.15 Given this situation, it is evident that one should implement this dualling measure by 2018, rather than delaying it until the final phase of development proceeds. All Do Something model runs should therefore include this assumption.
April 2011 ‐ 57 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.7 and 7.8 Wood Lane junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 20 5 2 2015 Do Min 17 10 3 2018 Ref 26 11 2 2018 Do Min 37 19 2 2021 Ref 27 3 2 2021 Do Min 92 11 2
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 11 23 2 2015 Do Min 13 12 2 2018 Ref 14 11 1 2018 Do Min 55 55 2 2021 Ref 24 37 1 2021 Do Min 47 33 1
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.16 It will be seen from tables 7.7 and 7.8 above that peak queue conditions at the Wood Lane junction in 2015 are not worsened with the development at this time. Traffic finds it difficult to enter and leave the junction and queues arise as a consequence.
7.17 By 2018 the situation in peaks deteriorates markedly with 60% of the development traffic flow being generated with longer queues forming on both Wood Lane and the A5 east (+40 and +45 respectively).
7.18 The conditions at the junction with the final development phase marginally deteriorate further in 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 58 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.9 and 7.10 Higham Roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) 2015 Ref 15 8 52 6 2015 Do Min 19 8 49 6 2018 Ref2410566 2018 Do Min 38 9 63 5 2021 Ref 41 8 54 7 2021 Do Min7211645
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) 2015 Ref 12 9 62 6 2015 Do Min1311626 2018 Ref1510636 2018 Do Min3110627 2021 Ref1812636 2021 Do Min6111637
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.19 It will be seen from tables 7.9 and 7.10 above that peak queue conditions at the Higham Lane roundabout remain broadly the same in peaks in 2015 with the first phase of MIRA development. From the assessments it is clear that the Higham lane approach has a capacity problem regardless of whether or not the MIRA development traffic is assumed.
7.20 In 2018 queue conditions on the side road approaches ie Nuneaton Lane and Higham Lane then slightly worsen in the AM peak. The conditions on the side roads rather than on the A5 then marginally deteriorate further in 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 59 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.11 and 7.12 Long Shoot junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 21 44 27 2015 Do Min 21 40 26 2018 Ref 23 45 35 2018 Do Min 19 56 48 2021 Ref 23 47 35 2021 Do Min 28 54 20
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) 2015 Ref 16 43 20 2015 Do Min 18 46 21 2018 Ref 20 47 30 2018 Do Min 24 75 43 2021 Ref 20 54 35 2021 Do Min 24 48 27
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.21 It will be seen from tables 7.11 and 7.12 above that peak queue conditions at this signalised T junction remain broadly the same in the 2015 peak situation with the first phase of development.
7.22 In 2018 conditions on the A47 Long Shoot approach then materially worsen with the development traffic with queues increasing by as much as 28 vehicles in the PM peak.
7.23 Conditions remain broadly the same in 2021, primarily due to the constrained operation the Dodwells junction to the east at this time.
April 2011 ‐ 60 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.13 and 7.14 Dodwells Roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref25377010 2015 Do Min3340777 2018 Ref3842778 2018 Do Min46479419 2021 Ref53507715 2021 Do Min 44 45 106 6
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) 2015 Ref1933675 2015 Do Min2032735 2018 Ref2938848 2018 Do Min 41 40 101 16 2021 Ref 33 40 101 14 2021 Do Min 36 46 100 5
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (17:00 to 18:00)
7.24 It will be seen from tables 7.13 and 7.14 above that peak queue conditions at this roundabout only marginally deteriorate in the 2015 peaks with the development (a maximum of around +8 additional vehicles).
7.25 However conditions in 2018 with the development then worsen markedly on the A 5 East and western approaches, further queue builds ups also take place on the Dodwells road and Coventry Road approaches in the AM peak.
7.26 Due to network constraints the modelled situation is little worse in 2021 than in 2018 at peaks.
Delays on Selected Routes (DM)
7.27 In relation to delays on the 10 selected routes within the modelled network, whilst results have been generated for all future situations (2015/2018/2021) both without and with the MIRA development, the analysis for the TA has centred around the 2021 situation when full development occupancy is assumed.
7.28 Plan 3 indicates the delays on the 10 routes in the AM and PM peaks for all of the modelled 2021 situations.
7.29 In relation to the Do Minimum situation vs. Reference situation it will be seen from table 7.15 below that the following changes in delay on the 10 routes were evident:
April 2011 ‐ 61 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 7.15 Delays on Selected routes (DM)
AM Peak 8:00‐9:00 PM Peak 17:00‐18:00 AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) Route 2021 2021 Ref DM change Ref DM change Hinck 1 NB 526 to 547 + 21 494 to 485 ‐ 9 Hinck 1 SB 617 to 739 + 122 524 to 560 + 36 Hinck 2 NB 585 to 802 + 217 672 to 686 + 14 Hinck 2 SB 897 to 1186 + 289 1008 to 1058 + 50 Hinck 3 EB 703 to 760 + 57 843 to 836 ‐ 7 Hinck 3 WB 501 to 563 + 62 582 to 557 ‐ 25 Hinck 4 NB 690 to 794 + 104 825 to 801 ‐ 24 Hinck 4 SB 1007 to 1071 + 64 975 to 1024 + 49 Hinck 5 EB 865 to 943 + 78 1473 to 1223 ‐ 250 Hinck 5 WB 909 to 1040 + 131 1243 to 1139 ‐ 104 A5 1 EB 632 to 606 ‐ 26 604 to 632 + 28 A5 1 WB 587 to 957 + 370 736 to 781 + 45 A5 2 EB 423 to 466 + 43 387 to 408 + 21 A5 2 WB 390 to 456 + 66 391 to 411 + 20 Nun 1 EB 1041 to 1268 + 227 1040 to 1093 + 53 Nun 1 WB 663 to 666 + 3724to758+ 34 Nun 2 NB 586 to 632 + 46 633 to 672 + 39 Nun 2 SB 845 to 917 + 72 683 to 650 ‐ 33 Nun 3 NB 540 to 808 + 268 743 to 800 + 57 Nun 3 SB 578 to 584 + 6612to645+ 33
7.30 It can be seen from the above table 7.15 that for the 2021 situation in some instances, the total delay on the A5 increased by as much as 370 seconds on the westbound direction of the western section of the A5, and that additional delays in excess of 250 seconds are experienced on one of the five Hinckley Routes and two of the three Nuneaton Routes.
7.31 At the same time it will also be seen that the levels of additional delay are less in the PM peak.
Average Peak network speeds
A5
7.32 Analysis of the model and the principal locations on the network where average speeds are generated indicated that on the A5 east of the Redgate, the average speed is 55mph in the AM peak and 56mph in
April 2011 ‐ 62 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
the PM peak in the 2021 reference situation. However, with the full development and Do minimum situation average speeds in the AM reduces to 53 mph, but remains the same in the PM peak.
7.33 In the vicinity of the Higham Roundabout the average speeds remain at 44mph in the AM peak and also in the PM Peak. Just to the east of Dodwells the average speeds increase from just 9mph in the AM peak to 10 mph with the Do Minimum situation and from 17 mph in the PM peak 19 mph with the MIRA Do minimum situation in 2021.
7.34 On the approach roads to the A5 the following link speeds are predicted for the 2021 situations in the reference and Do Minimum situations:
Nuneaton Lane: AM 39mph to 28 mph PM 30 mph to 30 mph
A47 Dodwells: AM 53 mph to 53 mph PM 51mph 46mph
Coventry Road: AM 17mph to 14 mph PM 18mph to 19mph
A47 Long Shoot: AM 21mph to 20 mph PM 20mph to 20 mph
General Findings of the Comparative Do Minimum vs. Reference Modelling Exercise
7.35 A comparison of the modelling results for the Do Minimum situation with the reference situations (principally the queue and delay assessments) clearly indicate that the development will have a material impact on network operation in peak periods from 2018 onwards and assuming by that time that around 60% of the MIRA development is built out.
7.36 Prior to this time, and assuming just 30% of the development is built out then the impact does not appear significant, with the exception of the Wood Lane Junction where queues form on Wood Lane due to the increase travel demand on the A5.
7.37 What was clear from the analysis was that traffic mitigation measures were required for the Redgate, Wood Lane, Higham roundabout, Long Shoot and Dodwells Junctions. At the same time it was also evident that the dualling of the A5 would be required between the MIRA roundabout access and the MIRA LiLo access in 2018 when 60% of the development is assumed to be built out. It had initially been thought that this would only be required by 2021 once 100% of the development.
7.38 A review of the wider network in Nuneaton and Hinckley indicated that the impact of the development was largely concentrated on the A5 and the A5 junctions as anticipated.
7.39 On a final note, it should be noted that the impacts as indicated in the Do Minimum modelling exercise were undertaken on the basis that no modal shift would take place as a consequence of the sustainable transport measures that MIRA are required to fund and implement as development comes forward. These measures will increasingly reduce car based travel demand by 10% in 2015 and by 15% in 2018
April 2011 ‐ 63 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
and by 20% in 2021. As a consequence, conditions on the network to the east of the MIRA site in particular would be better than indicated.
Development Traffic Impact –Junctions on the A5( T) To the West of The Model Boundary
7.40 As indicated in Section 5, it was evident from the MIRA employee surveys that that up to 17% of the MIRA development traffic could potentially route along the A5 (T) beyond the model boundary just to the east of Atherstone.
7.41 It was therefore agreed with the HA and County Councils that the situation in relation to this section of the A5 and the relevant junctions should be reviewed once the modelling work had progressed. At this time conclusions could be drawn as to whether further review and analysis of the impact of this development traffic on those 4 main junctions (see figure 3.5 in Section 3 ) that are located on this section of the A5 leading to the M42 should be carried out.
7.42 To provide some guidance in this matter, the modelled traffic flows on the A5 at the westernmost boundary of the Hinckley and Nuneaton Model have been reviewed, and specifically, site no. 12 west of the Redgate and just east of Atherstone. Between 0800‐0900 and 1700 in 2021 two way flows of 2657 and 2483 vehicles are predicted without the MIRA development by the model. With the MIRA development this level of flow this increases to 2785 and 2651 vehicles respectively. This corresponds to increases in traffic flow on the A5 at this location of between 4.8% and 6.8% at this location.
7.43 It is evident that the further west one travels from this point (i.e. passing Atherstone and beyond in the direction of the M42), then the less will be the percentage increase in traffic flow on the A5 due to the MIRA development. At each of the 4 junctions along this section, more and more MIRA traffic will turn off and leave the A5. Given the limited level of impact in terms of flow increases, it has been concluded that a review of junction operation on the A5 beyond the model boundary would not be required.
April 2011 ‐ 64 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8. PROPOSED TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES AND MIRA DO SOMETHING MODELLING RESULTS AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH BASELINE RUNS
8.1 During this stage of the exercise JMP again ran the Nuneaton and Hinckley Model for the future situations i.e. 2015, 2018 and 2021 with the corresponding 30%, 60% and 100% MIRA development assumptions.
8.2 As for the baseline situations, the model results included the peak traffic flows and speeds on selected links, junction flows and queues, and delays on the 10 routes and sections within the modelled network.
8.3 The overall purpose of the exercise was to establish the effectiveness of the traffic mitigation measures that had been devised for those junctions and areas of the network where the MIRA Do Minimum model runs had identified a material worsening in conditions and to then compare these runs with the proposed measures with the corresponding Baseline situations. In this way one could identify to what extent one could achieve the “nil detriment” target that had been set by the HA.
8.4 For this exercise it was assumed that the MIRA development would be served by the proposed new access phasing i.e. left in /left out access + existing T junction‐2015, but that the, Lilo + Rdbt access + dualling of the A5 would be implemented in 2018 (a requirement highlighted in the MIRA DM runs).
Proposed Traffic Mitigation Measures
8.5 Before running the Do something MIRA situation it was first necessary to devise mitigation measures for those areas of the network where a material worsening in conditions with the MIRA development had been identified during the course of this exercise.
8.6 As indicated in Section 7, the modelling results had indicated that conditions at the following junctions would worsen with the development:
The Red Gate/A444/A5 Staggered T junction
Wood Lane /A5
Higham Roundabout
Long Shoot Signals
Dodwells Roundabout
8.7 Given this situation, it was clear that mitigation measures would need to be implemented in relation to the above junctions as development came forward on the site, with the aim of at least offsetting the impact of the additional MIRA development traffic.
April 2011 ‐ 65 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.8 Before outlining the measures that have been devised for the junctions, it is worth noting that problems already exist at these junctions in peaks and that these will worsen over time even without MIRA development. This is recognised and the HA had previously commissioned studies to establish options for future improvement at the Red Gate, Long Shoot and Dodwells junctions. However, due to financial constraints the measures they have potentially identified are not in any programme.
8.9 The measures that were considered were significant both in terms of their scale and cost, and involved land beyond the highway boundary. This is not surprising as they are public schemes and are aimed at creating significantly improved operating and safety conditions for all road users. They also assume a reasonable design life and reserve capacity.
8.10 However, in the absence of these public improvements, the onous on private developers such as MIRA is not to resolve the situation. Instead, they must seek to ensure that traffic and safety conditions are no worse with development than would otherwise prevail, or at worst, any impact of development should not be material having regard to general traffic operation,. environment and safety.
8.11 It was agreed with the HA from the outset that conditions on the A5 were far from ideal in terms of these considerations and that “nil detriment” should be the aim of any impact/mitigation measures associated with the MIRA development.
8.12 Another important consideration was the fact that any road works should be undertaken within what is currently defined as public highway in order to ensure a feasible planning outcome.
8.13 In light of the above the following mitigation measures were devised for testing in the Do Something Model.
Redgate Junction‐A444/A5 (T)
8.14 This currently takes the form of a staggered T junction with the Northside A444 Atherstone Drive connection being separated by an 150 metre long section of the A5 from the South side Weddington Lane A444 connection. Right turn lanes then segregate these movements from the through traffic on the A5. The approaches to this junction have been reduced to single lanes so as to enable turning traffic to cross just one through lane in each direction on the A5. This was an accident remediation measure that was implemented in recent times.
8.15 In the past few years the HA put out options to consultation for improving this staggered T arrangement, with the favoured option being the provision of a single large roundabout on the A5 roughly to align with the A444 south side (Weddington Lane) junction, with the northern (Atherstone Drive) A444 route then realigned to the east of the Redgate pub and into the green field site to meet the new roundabout. The existing A5 line would then be severed at this location to create cul de sacs that would improve access to the surrounding properties.
April 2011 ‐ 66 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.16 Recent discussions with the HA indicate that the scheme was costed at 9m GBP and due to the cuts, is not in any programme for implementation. Warwickshire CC have been pushing the HA to improve the junction, as the A444 approaches are considered problematical and had an accident record that could only worsen if side road delays increase in future due to traffic growth on the A5(T).
8.17 In light of the above, an alternative measure has been devised and is indicated below in Figure 8.1.
Figure 8.1 Proposed Mitigation Measure for the A444/A5 (T) Red Gate Junction
8.18 It will be seen from figure 8.1 that the measure involves the creation of a lozenge shaped roundabout/gyratory that is designed to incorporate the two A444 north/south arms. At the same time it would be located within highway land.
8.19 The junction would extend for a distance of 190 metres (East/West) and would have an ICD at each end of between 30‐35m. Sufficient dimensions for 18m double drawbar design vehicles to turn at 20kph.
8.20 With this arrangement as indicated through traffic on the A5 is potentially only held up by turning traffic once as it passes through the 2 junctions.
8.21 Pedestrian/cyclist crossing facilities are indicated on the east side of the junction.
Wood Lane/A5 (T)
April 2011 ‐ 67 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.22 This junction is located some 380 metres to the east of the MIRA access on the A5(T) and currently takes the form of a simple all movements T junction. Vehicles turning right on the A5 into Wood Lane are required to wait on the A5 and due to the lack of segregated right turn lane, can block through traffic. Long queues often form on Wood Lane, with drivers being required to wait for a gap in the flow on the A5 in order to turn right.
8.23 In light of these concerns Figure 8.2 indicates an arrangement for the Wood Lane junction with the right turns eliminated by way of the provision of an elongated island within the A5(T). The carriageway would be widened to accommodate this measure as indicated.
Figure 8.2 Proposed Mitigation Measure for the Wood Lane/A5 (T) junction
Higham Roundabout
8.24 This 4 arm roundabout is located some 1.5 kms to the east of the MIRA Site. The modelling work was indicating that queues build on both the Higham Lane and Nuneaton Road approaches to the junction during peaks. In Figure 8.3 is indicated an arrangement where the 2 approaches have been revised to provide greater entrance widths and extended flare lengths.
April 2011 ‐ 68 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 8.3 Proposed mitigation measures to the Higham Roundabout
A47 Long Shoot/A5T) Signalised Junction
8.25 This junction has been the subject of a review by the HA in recent years as both it and its neighbouring junction, Dodwells to the east on the A5(T) experience operational problems during the peaks and which will deteriorate further with the MIRA development.
8.26 Halcrow reviewed options for the HA and their option 1 is indicated in figure 8.4 below.
April 2011 ‐ 69 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 8.4 Proposed mitigation measures to the A47/A5( T) Longshoot Junction
8.27 The measures include reorganised ped crossing facilities as well as reorganised lane configurations.
8.28 It should be noted that the A5 east of this junction remains unwidened due to land constraints. The favoured Halcrow option indicated this widened to dual carriageway standard to generate increased capacity.
8.29 The access to the pub is relocated with this option. It is currently located within the junction itself.
Dodwells Roundabout
8.30 Halcrow had proposed for the HA that the existing 4 arm roundabout be enlarged and then signalised. This measure would require land that appears beyond the highway boundary and so alternative measures have been devised. These are indicated below in Figure 8.5.
April 2011 ‐ 70 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 8.5 Proposed Mitigation measures to the Dodwells Roundabout
8.31 It can be seen from Figure 9.5 that the arrangements involve signalisation of the roundabout and the provision of a signalised eastbound A5 through lane across the roundabout centre (“hamburger“) and modified/extended entrance/exit tapers on the A5 (T).
MIRA Do Something Modelling Results and Comparative Analysis
8.32 Whilst the model was run with traffic mitigation measures for all future Do something situations i.e. 2015, 2018 and 2021, the analysis has mainly centred around the 2021 situation when full MIRA development occupation is assumed on the site. The key concern being whether with this situation by this time the proposed Mitigation measures are effective in offsetting the impact of development when compared with the corresponding reference situation.
8.33 As before, the analysis has centre around the flow changes, but more critically the junction operation impact and the overall delays on the 10 selected routes around the network.
April 2011 ‐ 71 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Traffic Flows 2021 Link Ref. Link Name AM PM Ref DS Diff. Ref DS Diff. 1 A444 Roanne Ringway (s of Queens Rd) 1707 1739 1,9% 1856 1887 1,6%
2 A444 Vicarage Street (w of Coton Rd) 1997 2040 2,1% 1709 1737 1,7% 3 A444 Newtown Road (w of Corporation St) 1556 1580 1,5% 1928 1943 0,8% 4 A444 Leicester Road 1577 1645 4,3% 1356 1318 ‐2,9% 5 Weddington Road (s of Old Hinckley Road) 1150 1252 8,8% 1680 1561 ‐7,1%
6Old Hinckley Road (w of Saints Way) 1469 1592 8,4% 1388 1519 9,5% 7 Weddington Road (s of Shanklin Dr) 1428 1536 7,5% 1618 1472 ‐9,0% 8Hinckley Road (e of Eastborough Way) 1160 1276 10,0% 1321 1286 ‐2,6% 9 Eastborough Way 2227 2199 ‐1,2% 2320 2364 1,9%
10 Midland Road 1522 1544 1,4% 1733 1762 1,7% 11 B4111 (Nuneaton Road) 684 681 ‐0,4% 689 688 ‐0,1% 12 A5 (Witherley Road) 2657 2785 4,8% 2483 2651 6,8% 13 A5 (Witherley Road) 2215 2417 9,1% 2208 2347 6,3%
14 A444 (Weddington Lane) 963 1119 16,1% 912 700 ‐23,2% 15 Higham Lane 817 778 ‐4,8% 761 1011 32,9% 16 A5 (Watling Street) 1749 1718 ‐1,7% 1750 1753 0,2% 17 A47 (Long Shoot) 1738 1887 8,5% 1759 1859 5,7%
18 A5 (Watling Street) 1546 1582 2,3% 1448 1824 26,0% 19 A5 (Watling Street) 2127 2189 2,9% 1988 2128 7,1% 20 A5 (Watling Street) 1370 1438 5,0% 1437 1476 2,7% 21 B4114 (Coventry Road) 693 695 0,4% 880 878 ‐0,3%
22 M69 5095 5101 0,1% 4879 4769 ‐2,2% 23 B4114 (Coventry Road) 591 600 1,6% 745 743 ‐0,3% 24 B581 (Broughton Road) 643 652 1,3% 467 445 ‐4,7% 24 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 589 584 ‐0,9% 614 618 0,7%
26 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 1129 1146 1,5% 1211 1231 1,6% 27 B581 (Stanton Road) 1026 1042 1,6% 1097 1074 ‐2,1% 28 Carrs Hill 788 786 ‐0,3% 896 897 0,2% 29 Heath Lane 197 205 3,8% 222 223 0,5%
30 A447 (Ashby Road) 935 972 4,1% 933 970 4,0% 31 A47 (Normandy Way) 1413 1375 ‐2,7% 1535 1539 0,3% 32 B4668 (Leicester Road) 1544 1535 ‐0,6% 1384 1353 ‐2,3% 33 Butt Lane 239 251 5,0% 202 205 1,8%
34 B4667 (Ashby Road) 877 855 ‐2,5% 1056 1078 2,1% 35 A47 (Normandy Way) 2058 2047 ‐0,5% 2058 2071 0,6% 36 A47 (Normandy Way) 1768 1780 0,7% 2043 2056 0,7% 37 Hollycroft 909 956 5,3% 1007 1085 7,7%
38 B590 (Leicester Road) 773 760 ‐1,7% 882 874 ‐0,9% 39 B590 (London Road) 1438 1456 1,3% 1530 1480 ‐3,3% 40 B4669 (Burbage Road) 1507 1487 ‐1,3% 1413 1407 ‐0,4%
41 B590 (Southfield Road) 525 517 ‐1,5% 478 469 ‐1,9% 42 Brookside 238 247 3,5% 274 276 0,5% 43 Rugby Road 1802 1873 3,9% 1957 1935 ‐1,1% 44 Rugby Road 889 886 ‐0,3% 1077 927 ‐13,9%
45 Trinity Lane 921 933 1,3% 1148 1099 ‐4,3% 46 Mount Road 433 468 8,2% 514 517 0,6% 47 Trinity Lane 1390 1387 ‐0,2% 1601 1638 2,3% 48 B4666 (Coventry Road) 933 982 5,2% 1033 1167 13,0%
49 Westfield Road 480 520 8,3% 700 649 ‐7,3% 50 B4666 (Coventry Road) 1344 1442 7,3% 1516 1453 ‐4,1%
April 2011 ‐ 72 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.34 It can be seen from the above table that the model results indicated a range of percentage flow changes (both pluses and minuses) when the Do Minimum situation was compared with the corresponding baseline or reference situations.
8.35 In thhis 2021 situation the AM peak flow changes with development ranged between ‐4.8% and +16.1%. On the A5 the flow changes at this time ranged between +4.8% just to the west of the Redgate through to ‐1.7% by the Higham Roundabout to 2.3% just east of the Dodwells junction.
8.36 It was clear at the same time that again as with the Do Minimum situation, some of the most significant changes took place on the network and main road approaches to the A5. For example, the A47 Long Shoot experiences an 8.5% increase in flow in the AM peak and similarly the Coventry Road approach to the Dodwells junction a 7.3% increase.
Junction operation
Table 8.1 and 8.2 A444 /A5 Redgate West junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 14 12 6 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 47 20 8 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 6 0 8
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 7 10 5 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 15 14 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 3 0 6
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.37 It will be seen from tables 8.1 and 8.2 above that the implementation of the elongated roundabout/gyratory system improves queue conditions on the A444 approach to the A5 with queues on this approach reducing such that they are less than for the reference situation (i.e. 6 vs. 14 in the AM Peak). Queues on the A5 remain the same.
April 2011 ‐ 73 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 8.3 and 8.4 A444 /A5 Redgate East junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 4 7 7 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 21 63 9 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 4 16 0
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 4 12 3 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 5 24 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 4 17 0
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.38 It will be seen from tables 8.3 and 8.4 that the implementation of the elongated roundabout/gyratory system at this location improves peak queue conditions on the A5 approaches. At the same time, the measure largely offsets the impact of the development in terms of queues on the A444 Weddington Lane approach with some increase of between 5 and 9 vehicles.
Table 8.5 and 8.6 MIRA Access junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 2 10 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 2 3 28 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something228
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 18 2 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 23 4 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 23 3 3
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.39 It is evident that with the implementation of the dualling of the A5 between the main access roundabout and the LiLo access that queue conditions on the A5 main approaches during peaks are satisfactory. However, the results indicate a queue length of 23 vehicles on the MIRA access in the PM peak.
April 2011 ‐ 74 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
MIRA Site Access Capacities‐ARCADY/PICADY Assessments
8.40 As with all the offsite assessment of queues and delays, the MIRA access roundabout performance with increased levels of development over the years (2015‐2021) was based on the PARAMICS modelling exercise.
8.41 With the full development in operation on the site in the year 2021 the model was indicating minimal queues on the A5 (between 3 and 4 vehicles in peaks) but significant queues of 23 vehicles on the MIRA Drive approach to the roundabout in the PM Peak.
8.42 Given this situation, the access arrangements (both roundabout and LiLo) were assessed using programs ARCADY and PICADY to establish the capacity and queue performance in more detail. For this exercise the PARAMICS flow predictions for the site and A5 formed the basis of the ARCADY/PICADY runs.
8.43 The results of the exercise are summarised in Tables 8.7 and 8.8 below.
Table 8.7 Summary of ARCADY Analysis – MIRA Access / A5
2021 ARM AM Peak Hour (0800‐0900) PM Peak Hour (1700‐1800) Max. RFC Max. Queue Max. RFC Max. Queue A5 (NW) 0,814 4,2 0,536 1,1 MIRA 0,051 0,1 0,553 1,2 A5 (SE) 0,702 2,3 0,616 1,6 Farm Access 0,000 0,0 0,000 0,0
Table 8.8 Summary of PICADY Analysis – MIRA Access LILO / A5
2021 STREAM AM Peak Hour (0800‐0900) PM Peak Hour (1700‐1800) Max. RFC Max. Queue Max. RFC Max. Queue Mira Access 0.052 0.1 0.316 0.5 (left Only) A5 (SE) 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0
8.44 From the tables it can be seen that the maximum queue length of 4 vehicles is indicated to take place in the AM peak on the eastbound approach of the A5 to the access roundabout and just over 1 vehicle was indicated on the MIRA access in the PM peak. The ARCADY assessment indicates a max RFC of 0.814 on the eastbound approach to the roundabout in the AM peak in 2021.
April 2011 ‐ 75 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.45 It would therefore appear from this assessment that the PARAMICS prediction for the MIRA access exit may be somewhat pessimistic and that the actual queue length by this time will lie somewhere in between.
8.46 The PICADY assessment did not highlight any queue or capacity problems associated with the LiLo access in peaks.
Table 8.9 and 8.10 Wood Lane junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 27 3 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 92 11 2 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 21 0 2
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 24 37 1 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 47 33 1 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 21 0 3
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.47 With the conversion of this junction to left in/left out only operation it will be seen from tables 8.9 and 8.10 above that queue conditions on the Wood Lane approach to the A5 improve markedly in the peaks when compared with the do minimum situation such that the length of queue is the same as in the reference situation. Likewise conditions on the A5 east approach improve with the elimination of the right turn that previously would have blocked through flow on the Trunk Road in both the reference and Do Minimum situations.
April 2011 ‐ 76 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 8.11 and 8.12 Higham Roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 41 8 54 7 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min7211645 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something3437437
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref1812636 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min6111637 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something34364110
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.48 From tables 8.11 and 8.12 above it can be seen that the proposed mitigation measures for the junction improve queue conditions on all approaches except for the A5 east in the AM peak. In the PM peak this also remains a problem along with the Nuneaton Lane approach.
Table 8.13 and 8.14 Long Shoot junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 23 47 35 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 28 54 20 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 30 32 29
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 20 54 35 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 24 48 27 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 27 33 44
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.49 From tables 8.13 and 8.14 above it can be seen that the proposed mitigation measures for the junction improve queue conditions on all approaches in the AM peak such that queue conditions are broadly comparable with the Reference situation. In the PM peak conditions are better on the A47 Longshoot approach and marginally worse on the A5 approaches.
April 2011 ‐ 77 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 8.15 and 8.16 Dodwells Roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref53507715 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 44 45 106 6 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something5046938
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 33 40 101 14 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 36 46 100 5 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something55467310
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.50 It will be seen from tables 8.15 and 8.16 above that during the AM peak queue conditions improve on all approaches to the junction except for the A5 E where they increase by around 16 vehicles. During the PM peak a problem still remains on the Dodwells Road approach
April 2011 ‐ 78 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Delays on Selected Routes (DS)
Table 8.17 Delays on Selected routes (DS)
AM Peak 8:00‐9:00 PM Peak 17:00‐18:00 AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) Route 2021 2021 Ref DS change Ref DS change Hinck 1 NB 526 to 464 ‐ 62 494 to 480 ‐ 14 Hinck 1 SB 617 to 759 + 142 524 to 679 + 155 Hinck 2 NB 585 to 550 ‐ 35 672 to 645 ‐ 27 Hinck 2 SB 897 to 1012 + 115 1008 to 1146 + 138 Hinck 3 EB 703 to 673 ‐ 30 843 to 873 + 30 Hinck 3 WB 501 to 514 + 13 582 to 529 ‐ 53 Hinck 4 NB 690 to 689 ‐ 1825to744‐ 81 Hinck 4 SB 1007 to 1003 ‐ 4 975 to 1063 + 88 Hinck 5 EB 865 to 846 ‐ 19 1473 to 1056 ‐ 417 Hinck 5 WB 909 to 969 + 60 1243 to 1134 ‐ 109 A5 1 EB 632 to 488 ‐ 144 604 to 550 ‐ 54 A5 1 WB 587 to 875 + 288 736 to 764 + 28 A5 2 EB 423 to 510 + 87 387 to 522 + 135 A5 2 WB 390 to 475 + 85 391 to 468 + 77 Nun 1 EB 1041 to 1017 ‐ 24 1040 to 847 ‐ 193 Nun 1 WB 663 to 640 ‐ 23 724 to 796 + 72 Nun 2 NB 586 to 577 ‐ 9633to638+ 5 Nun 2 SB 845 to 968 + 123 683 to 740 + 57 Nun 3 NB 540 to 527 ‐ 13 743 to 709 ‐ 34
Nun 3 SB 578 to 573 ‐ 5612to688+ 76
8.51 From the above table it can be seen that although there is still an increase of 288 seconds on the western section of the A5, this increase with traffic mitigation is substantially less than for the Do Minimum situation when the delay increase on this selected was in excess of 350 seconds. Similarly, the increases in delay on the Hinckley and Nuneaton Routes are materially less than for the Do Minimum situation.
April 2011 ‐ 79 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Average Peak network speeds ‐ DS
8.52 Analysis of the model and the principal locations on the network where average speeds are generated indicated that on the A5 east of the Redgate, the average speed is 55mph in the AM peak and 56mph in the PM peak in the 2021 reference situation. However, with the full development and Do Something situation average speeds in the AM reduces to 48 mph but remains the same in the PM peak.
8.53 In the vicinity of the Higham Roundabout the average speeds reduce from 44mph to 35mph in the AM peak and from 44 mph to 38 mph the PM Peak. Just to the east of Dodwells the average speeds increase from just 9mph in the AM peak to 20mph with the Do something situation and from 17 mph in the PM peak to 25 mph with the MIRA Do Something situation in 2021.
8.54 On the approach roads to the A5 the following link speeds are predicted for the 2021 situations in the reference and Do Something situations:
Nuneaton Lane: AM 39mph to 37 mph PM 30 mph to 37 mph
A47 Dodwells: AM 53 mph to 53 mph PM 51mph 48mph
Coventry Road: AM 17mph to 23 mph PM 18mph to 23mph
A47 Long Shoot: AM 21mph to 25 mph PM 20mph to 27 mph
General Findings of the Results
8.55 Having devised and tested the mitigation measures for what were identified as being the problematical junctions in terms of traffic operation with the MIRA development, it was clear that whilst some of the measures were effective, and broadly offset the impact of the full development in 2021 (e.g. Redgate, MIRA access and Wood Lane junctions), the proposed traffic mitigation measures for the remaining junctions (Higham Roundabout, Long Shoot and Dodwells) improved the situation, but not to a point where conditions were broadly comparable with the 2021 reference situation.
8.56 In terms of delays on the 10 selected routes it was evident that the mitigation measures had the effect of reducing the levels of delay increase on the A5 (west) and on the key Hinckley and Nuneaton Routes.
8.57 In light of these findings, it was evident that consideration would need to be given to the impact of the planned sustainable transport measures on MIRA travel demand, and in turn the extent to which any resultant reduction in MIRA vehicle trips would assist in further mitigating traffic impact at the critical junctions.
April 2011 ‐ 80 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Impact of Sustainable Transport Measures on MIRA Car based Demand
8.58 As indicated previously, neither the traffic generation data nor the modelling assessments that were undertaken for the Do Minimum or Do Something situations with MIRA development had allowed for any modal shift or reduction in car trips arising as a consequence of the sustainable transport measures and Travel Plan that is to be implemented in association with the development.
8.59 The measures that are actually to be implemented are very significant, and once fully in operation are likely to result in a reduction in MIRA related car trips of at least 20%. The measures have been outlined in Section 4 and will be described in more detail in Section 9 of this TA. The Travel Plan(Appendix D) also outlines the measures that are proposed.
8.60 The question one must consider is the extent to which these sustainable transport measures and any associated reduction in car based travel demand will assist in further mitigating the impact of the proposed development, particularly in relation to those junctions that even with mitigation, still experience some degree of deterioration in peaks with the Masterplan development.
8.61 The area wide model was therefore run again for both AM and PM peaks in 2021, with allowance being made for the overall 20% modal shift. However, before running the model the trip matrices had to be adjusted to realistically reflect the impact of the measures. For this exercise it was assumed given that all the pedestrian/cyclist measures and the 6 new bus routes that are proposed with the development would largely be to the benefit of those employees within the development who are residing in Hinckley and Nuneaton, that the reduction in carbon trips should only be applied to those trips that either have an origin or destination in zones in/around these two settlements.
8.62 The table below indicates the impact of the revisions to the demands within the model. Based on the numbers below one is removing 499 car trips in the 3 hour AM period and 477 trips in the 3 hour PM period .
8.63 The trips were removed, proportionally, from journeys which start or end in either Hinckley or Nuneaton.
Table 8.18 Sustainable transport trip adjustments AM PM Original Revised Diff Diff (%) Original Revised Diff Diff (%) Totals 2495 1996 499 20% 2385 1908 477 20% Town Related 1088 589 499 46% 904 427 477 53%
April 2011 ‐ 81 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
MIRA Do Something Modelling Results with sustainable transport measures and Comparative Analysis 2021 Link Ref. Link Name AM PM Ref DS+PT Diff. Ref DS+PT Diff.
1 A444 Roanne Ringway (s of Queens Rd) 1707 1742 2,1% 1856 1920 3,4% 2 A444 Vicarage Street (w of Coton Rd) 1997 2059 3,1% 1709 1745 2,1% 3 A444 Newtown Road (w of Corporation St) 1556 1576 1,3% 1928 1948 1,0% 4 A444 Leicester Road 1577 1624 3,0% 1356 1345 ‐0,8% 5 Weddington Road (s of Old Hinckley Road) 1150 1209 5,1% 1680 1616 ‐3,8% 6Old Hinckley Road (w of Saints Way) 1469 1580 7,6% 1388 1527 10,1% 7 Weddington Road (s of Shanklin Dr) 1428 1475 3,2% 1618 1484 ‐8,3% 8Hinckley Road (e of Eastborough Way) 1160 1255 8,2% 1321 1314 ‐0,5% 9 Eastborough Way 2227 2178 ‐2,2% 2320 2332 0,5% 10 Midland Road 1522 1547 1,6% 1733 1792 3,4% 11 B4111 (Nuneaton Road) 684 665 ‐2,7% 689 686 ‐0,3% 12 A5 (Witherley Road) 2657 2792 5,1% 2483 2700 8,8% 13 A5 (Witherley Road) 2215 2385 7,6% 2208 2360 6,9% 14 A444 (Weddington Lane) 963 987 2,4% 912 691 ‐24,2% 15 Higham Lane 817 838 2,6% 761 936 22,9% 16 A5 (Watling Street) 1749 1750 0,1% 1750 1774 1,4% 17 A47 (Long Shoot) 1738 1836 5,6% 1759 1890 7,4% 18 A5 (Watling Street) 1546 1673 8,2% 1448 1908 31,7% 19 A5 (Watling Street) 2127 2245 5,6% 1988 2255 13,4% 20 A5 (Watling Street) 1370 1453 6,1% 1437 1575 9,6%
21 B4114 (Coventry Road) 693 693 0,1% 880 889 1,0% 22 M69 5095 5122 0,5% 4879 4938 1,2% 23 B4114 (Coventry Road) 591 591 0,1% 745 758 1,7% 24 B581 (Broughton Road) 643 649 0,9% 467 451 ‐3,6% 24 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 589 600 1,9% 614 626 2,0% 26 B4669 (Hinckley Road) 1129 1151 2,0% 1211 1215 0,4% 27 B581 (Stanton Road) 1026 1040 1,4% 1097 1064 ‐3,0% 28 Carrs Hill 788 796 0,9% 896 908 1,3% 29 Heath Lane 197 200 1,4% 222 225 1,6% 30 A447 (Ashby Road) 935 964 3,1% 933 961 3,1% 31 A47 (Normandy Way) 1413 1389 ‐1,7% 1535 1538 0,2% 32 B4668 (Leicester Road) 1544 1553 0,6% 1384 1372 ‐0,9% 33 Butt Lane 239 239 ‐0,1% 202 202 0,1% 34 B4667 (Ashby Road) 877 869 ‐0,9% 1056 1082 2,4% 35 A47 (Normandy Way) 2058 2057 0,0% 2058 2064 0,3% 36 A47 (Normandy Way) 1768 1777 0,5% 2043 2057 0,7% 37 Hollycroft 909 959 5,5% 1007 1043 3,5% 38 B590 (Leicester Road) 773 782 1,1% 882 864 ‐2,0% 39 B590 (London Road) 1438 1432 ‐0,4% 1530 1490 ‐2,6% 40 B4669 (Burbage Road) 1507 1521 0,9% 1413 1462 3,4%
41 B590 (Southfield Road) 525 515 ‐2,0% 478 470 ‐1,7% 42 Brookside 238 254 6,5% 274 281 2,2% 43 Rugby Road 1802 1846 2,5% 1957 1920 ‐1,9% 44 Rugby Road 889 879 ‐1,2% 1077 990 ‐8,1% 45 Trinity Lane 921 940 2,1% 1148 1143 ‐0,5% 46 Mount Road 433 441 1,9% 514 532 3,6% 47 Trinity Lane 1390 1410 1,4% 1601 1645 2,8% 48 B4666 (Coventry Road) 933 1008 8,0% 1033 1142 10,5% 49 Westfield Road 480 493 2,7% 700 617 ‐11,8% 50 B4666 (Coventry Road) 1344 1432 6,5% 1516 1481 ‐2,3%
April 2011 ‐ 82 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.64 It can be seen from the above table that the model results indicated a broad range of percentage flow changes (both pluses and minuses) when the Do Something situation with sustainable transport measures is compared with the corresponding baseline or reference situations.
8.65 In the 2021 situation the AM peak flow changes with development ranged between ‐3.6% and +4.7%. In 2018 the flow changes ranged between ‐2.2% and +8.2%.
8.66 On the A5 the flow changes ranged between +5.1% to the west of the Redgate through to just ‐0.1% at the Higham Roundabout and + 8.2 % just east of Dodwells.
8.67 It was clear at the same time that again as with the Do Something, some of the most significant changes took place on the network and main road approaches to the A5. For example, the A47 Long Shoot experiences an 5.6% increase in flow in the AM peak and similarly the Coventry Road approach to the Dodwells junction a 6.5% increase. However, due to the allowance for the sustainable transport measures it was also very clear that the levels of increase were reduced during peaks.
Junction operation and Queues
Table 8.19 and 8.20 A444/A5(T) Redgate West junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 14 12 6 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 47 20 8 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 6 0 8 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 3 0 7
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 3Arm AArm BArm C Atherstone Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 7 10 5 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 15 14 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 3 0 6 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 3 0 7
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 3 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.68 It will be seen from tables 8.18 and 8.19 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures has a limited impact on the performance of this mitigated junction during peak hours.
April 2011 ‐ 83 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 8.21 and 8.22 A444/A5(T) Redgate East junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 4 7 7 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 21 63 9 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 4 16 0 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP4100
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 4Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) Weddington Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 4 12 3 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 5 24 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 4 17 0 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP5180
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 4 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.69 It will be seen from tables 8.20 and 8.21 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures has a limited impact on the performance of this mitigated junction during peak hours.
Table 8.23 and 8.24 MIRA/ A5(T) Roundabout Access
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 2 10 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 2 3 28 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something228 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP226
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 5Arm AArm BArm C Mira Drive A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 18 2 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 23 4 4 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 23 3 3 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 22 3 3
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 5 (17:00 to 18:00)
April 2011 ‐ 84 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.70 It will be seen from tables 8.22 and 8.23 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures has a limited impact on the performance of this mitigated junction during peak hours.
Table 8.25 and 8.26 Wood Lane junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 27 3 2 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 92 11 2 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 21 0 2 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 16 0 2
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 6Arm AArm BArm C Wood Lane A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 24 37 1 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 47 33 1 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 21 0 3 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 12 0 2
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 6 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.71 It will be seen from tables 8.24 and 8.25 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures further reduces the queues on the mitigated junction such that conditions are improved even over the reference situation.
Table 8.27 and 8.28 Higham Roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 41 8 54 7 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min7211645 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something3437437 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 33 28 38 7
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 7Arm AArm BArm CArm D Nuneaton Lane A5 (E) Higham Lane A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref1812636 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min6111637 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something34364110 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 32 32 40 12
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 7 (17:00 to 18:00)
April 2011 ‐ 85 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.72 It will be seen from tables 8.26 and 8.27 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures improves queue conditions when compared with the situation with just the traffic mitigation. The only queue that remains worsened with the full development is on the A5 E in both peaks where the increase over the reference is still quite significant, but the queues are less on Higham and Nuneaton Lane approaches in the AM peak.
Table 8.29 and 8.30 Long Shoot junction
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 23 47 35 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 28 54 20 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 30 32 29 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 29 30 28
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 8Arm AArm BArm C A5 (E) A47 (The Longshoot) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 20 54 35 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 24 48 27 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something 27 33 44 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 28 32 34
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 8 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.73 It will be seen from tables 8.28 and 8.29 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures slightly improves queue conditions when compared with the situation with just the traffic mitigation. This is particularly the case on the A5 W in the PM peak.
April 2011 ‐ 86 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Table 8.31 and 8.32 Dodwells roundabout
Period: 8:00 ‐ 9:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref53507715 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 44 45 106 6 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something5046938 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 50 41 77 8
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (8:00 to 9:00)
Period: 17:00 ‐ 18:00
Junction 9Arm AArm BArm CArm D Dodwells Road Coventry Road A5 (E) A5 (W) Scenario 4 2021 Ref 33 40 101 14 Scenario 5 2021 Do Min 36 46 100 5 Scenario 6 2021 Do Something55467310 Scenario 7 2021 Do Something + TP 52 38 61 9
QUEUING: Average Hourly Maximum Queue Length (Veh) ‐ Junction 9 (17:00 to 18:00)
8.74 It will be seen from tables 8.30 and 8.31 above that allowance for the sustainable transport measures improves queue conditions when compared with the situation with just the traffic mitigation. During the AM peak it is evident that queue conditions with the mitigation measures and sustainable transport measures are the same or even better than in the reference 2021 situation.
8.75 Similarly conditions with the mitigation measures are improved in the PM peak with the exception of the Dodwells Road approach to the junction.
April 2011 ‐ 87 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Delays on Selected Routes (DS+PT)
Table 8.33 Delays on Selected routes (DS+PT)
AM Peak 8:00‐9:00 PM Peak 17:00‐18:00 AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) AVERAGE DELAY (seconds) Route 2021 2021 Ref DS+TP change Ref DS+TP change Hinck 1 NB 526 to 477 ‐ 49 494 to 472 ‐ 22 Hinck 1 SB 617 to 768 + 151 524 to 664 + 140 Hinck 2 NB 585 to 571 ‐ 14 672 to 604 ‐ 68 Hinck 2 SB 897 to 1015 + 118 1008 to 1019 + 11 Hinck 3 EB 703 to 721 + 18 843 to 847 + 4 Hinck 3 WB 501 to 495 ‐ 6 582 to 518 ‐ 64 Hinck 4 NB 690 to 689 ‐ 1 825 to 746 ‐ 79 Hinck 4 SB 1007 to 1032 + 25 975 to 1043 + 68 Hinck 5 EB 865 to 838 ‐ 27 1473 to 1115 ‐ 358 Hinck 5 WB 909 to 951 + 42 1243 to 1110 ‐ 133 A5 1 EB 632 to 505 ‐ 127 604 to 526 ‐ 78 A5 1 WB 587 to 789 + 202 736 to 658 ‐ 78 A5 2 EB 423 to 496 + 73 387 to 479 + 92 A5 2 WB 390 to 453 + 63 391 to 455 + 64 Nun 1 EB 1041 to 931 ‐ 110 1040 to 808 ‐ 232 Nun 1 WB 663 to 640 ‐ 23 724 to 745 + 21 Nun 2 NB 586 to 578 ‐ 8 633 to 662 + 29 Nun 2 SB 845 to 883 + 38 683 to 678 ‐ 5 Nun 3 NB 540 to 502 ‐ 38 743 to 684 ‐ 59 Nun 3 SB 578 to 568 ‐ 10 612 to 645 + 33
Table 8.34 Total average delay on 10 routes in network 2021
TOTAL AVERAGE DELAY ON 10 ROUTES IN NETWORK 2021 Ref DM DS DS+TP AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 15 805 15 219 14 129 15 071 13 902 14 478 13 585 15 192 + 2220 + 27 + 544 ‐ 121 + 317 ‐ 714 16% 0% 4% ‐1% 2% ‐5%
April 2011 ‐ 88 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.76 From the above tables it can be seen that although there is still an increase of 202 seconds on the western section of the A5, this increase with both traffic mitigation and allowance for the modal shift is substantially less than for the Do Minimum situation when the delay increase was in excess of 350 seconds. Similarly, the increases in delay on the Hinckley and Nuneaton Routes are materially less than for the Do Minimum situation.
8.77 Importantly also, it will be seen that a general summation of the delay changes (nb maybe not statistically sound, but nevertheless a general guide) indicates that the Do Minimum summated change in delays on the 10 routes of +16% in the AM peak when compared with the 2021 reference becomes a 2% increase in the same period, but with mitigation measures and sustainable transport measures assumed.
Average Peak network speeds
8.78 Analysis of the model and the principal locations on the network where average speeds are generated indicated that on the A5 east of the Redgate, the average speed is 55mph in the AM peak and 56mph in the PM peak in the 2021 reference situation. However, with the full development and the Do something +PT situation average speeds in the AM reduces to 50 mph but is 54mph in the PM peak.
8.79 In the vicinity of the Higham Roundabout the average speeds reduce from 44mph to 38mph in the AM peak and from 44 mph to 39 mph the PM Peak. Just to the east of Dodwells the average speeds increase from just 9mph in the AM peak to 20 mph with the Do something +PT situation and from 17 mph in the PM peak to 25mph with the MIRA Do Something+PT situation in 2021.
8.80 On the approach roads to the A5 the following link speeds are predicted for the 2021 situations in the reference and Do Something + PT measures situations:
Nuneaton Lane : AM 39mph to 39 mph PM 30 mph to 30 mph
A47 Dodwells: AM 53 mph to 53 mph PM 51mph 48mph
Coventry Road: AM 17mph to 22 mph PM 18mph to 23 mph
A47 Long Shoot: AM 21mph to 29 mph PM 20mph to 27 mph
General Findings of the Results
8.81 The model result with both traffic mitigation measures and the MIRA sustainable transport measures in operation in 2021 indicate that conditions are further improved at the three main junctions on the A5 where problems persisted with the development traffic flow and the traffic mitigation measures alone i.e. Higham Roundabout, Long Shoot and Dodwells. The queue analysis indicated that only on one approach to the Higham Roundabout (A5 E) and the Dodwells Roundabout (Dodwells Road) were queues materially longer than in the 2021 reference situation.
April 2011 ‐ 89 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
8.82 In relation to delays on the selected routes it was evident that allowance for the sustainable transport measures within the modelling process resulted in less marked increases than in the situation that just the traffic mitigation measures are assumed. Whilst an increase in excess of 3 minutes is indicated in delays westbound on the A5 in the AM peak west of the MIRA site there is at the same time a 2 minute reduction eastbound.
8.83 The model runs/assessments were indicating that as a consequence of the network constraints on the A5 junctions to the east of the site on A5, and even in the absence the development traffic was rerouting from/to Hinckley by way of Nutts Lane and its junction junctions on the A5. Matters then worsen with the development on both eastern and western A5 approaches.
8.84 However, in 2021 with the development mitigation measures and the sustainable transport measures the conditions on this junction in peaks improve even compared with the reference situation, mainly as a consequence of traffic rerouting via Dodwells which is improved with the development.
April 2011 ‐ 90 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9. PROPOSED SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT MEASURES
Walking
9.1 Measures to promote walking through the MIRA Technology Park Masterplan will have a limited effect in terms of employee trips to / from place of residence given the location of the site in relation to surrounding settlements however a suite of measures are proposed on‐site to raise awareness of the health benefits and reduce reliance on the use of the private car throughout the working day.
9.2 This will be achieved through:
The provision of a network of footways / footpaths along key movement corridors within the MIRA Technology Park to encourage people to walk between the various buildings / functions. These routes will be direct, signed, well maintained and lit (where appropriate);
The provision of on‐site, small scale leisure, retail and health / fitness facilities that people can walk to during lunchtime periods and throughout the day thereby reducing the need to travel by car to comparable facilities off‐site;
Buildings to be provided with cloakroom facilities with storage lockers etc.;
Mapping to be provided to all staff working within the MIRA Technology Park through both paper and web‐based mediums detailing safe walking routes throughout the site.
Cycling
9.3 The MIRA Technology Park Masterplan will deliver significant investment into encouraging greater use of cycling both within the site itself and for journeys to / from work from neighbouring communities, taking advantage of its proximity to the National Cycle Network Route 52.
MIRABike scheme
9.4 Some of the distances between buildings / functions within the MIRA Technology Park are such that walking is impractical. To reduce reliance on the use of a car to get between buildings / functions on‐ site, e.g. between the main area of the Technology Park on the A5 frontage and ‘trackside’ facilities on the Proving Ground, the MIRABike scheme will be introduced.
9.5 MIRABike is similar to the Barclays‐sponsored cycle hire scheme in Central London whereby ‘stations’ will be strategically located throughout MIRA Technology Park enabling people to access bicycles for short‐term hire. The bicycles will be accessed using a swipe card or key‐pad entry (or similar) and each MIRABike station will be located in secure, lockable covered shelters.
April 2011 ‐ 91 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9.6 MIRABike stations and key routes within the MIRA Technology Park will be signed and each employee will be provided with mapping to show the locations of these facilities. In addition mapping will be posted on the ‘Travel’ page of a dedicated MIRA Technology Park web‐site.
Other On‐Site Measures to Promote Cycling
9.7 All buildings within the MIRA Technology Park will be provided with secure, covered cycle parking facilities located close to the main pedestrian entrance of the building. Cycle parking will be provided in accordance with the Leicestershire County Council standards as contained within the document ‘Highways, Transportation & Development – the Leicestershire Guide’ (2005) as follows:
Employment Uses (Use Class B1(a) & B1(b)) ‐ 1 cycle space per 400m2 GFA
Hotel Use (Use Class C1) ‐ 1 cycle space per 5 rooms
Retail (local shops) (Use Class A1) ‐ 1 space per 500m2 for staff / 1 space per 1000m2 for customers
Pub / Restaurant (Use Class A3) ‐ 1 space per 500m2 for staff / 1 space per 1000m2 for customers
Health & Fitness Club (Use Class D2) ‐ 5% no. visitors at any one time
9.8 All buildings within the MIRA Technology Park will be provided with lockers, changing / drying facilities and showers for employee use.
9.9 Employers and employees will also be made aware of Government‐led incentives for bike‐loans etc. through the Travel Plan Coordinator in conjunction with the Working Group representative. This system encourages the employers to purchase the cycles outright, then lease them to employees for a small weekly contribution. At the end of the scheme (at the employer’s discretion) the loaned cycles can be sold to the employees at a reduced price.
9.10 Alternatively employers will be encouraged to provide interest free loans to those employees who wish to purchase cycle/cycle equipment outright. Those employees who use their own bicycles for work purposes (excluding commutes to/from work) will also be reminded that they can claim 20 pence per mile tax free.
9.11 All cycle routes within the MIRA Technology Park will be well maintained. The Travel Plan Coordinator in conjunction with the Working Group representative of each individual organisation or business within the MIRA Technology Park will continuously monitor demand for cycle parking and review the need for alterations to the proposed level of provision as part of the annual review process.
April 2011 ‐ 92 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9.12 The potential will also be explored by the Travel Plan Coordinator to secure the provision of a ‘bike clinic’ within the MIRA Technology Park village centre that could include maintenance facilities and the hire / purchase of cycling equipment.
Off‐Site Cycle Infrastructure Improvements
9.13 The MIRA Technology Park Masterplan will deliver substantial investment into improving off‐site cycle links to/from local communities that would be phased as development on the site is released. This comprises two key elements, namely:
Improvements to the ‘Weddington Country Walk’ cycleway – (NCN 52); and
A5 corridor improvements (between the Redgate and Higham Lane junctions).
9.14 The Weddington Country Walk is an off‐carriageway shared footway / cycleway that forms part of the National Cycle Network and runs along a former railway track bed linking the MIRA Technology Park with the residential communities to the north and west of Nuneaton. It also connects with the existing cycleway that runs along the Coventry Canal through the heart of Nuneaton and beyond towards Rugby and Leamington Spa as well as on‐carriageway cycleways within Nuneaton itself. NCN 52 also continues northwards to the east of MIRA Technology Park with links to Higham‐on‐the‐Hill and Market Bosworth using quiet rural lanes. As such the opportunities to encourage future employees who live along or close to the existing network to cycle to / from work are considerable.
9.15 The proposed improvements to the Weddington Country Walk have been worked up in consultation with SUSTRANS and the cycle officers at both Leicestershire and Warwickshire County Councils and comprise the following:
The resurfacing of the Weddington Country Walk between MIRA Technology Park and the underpass to the West Coast Main Line (Stoney Road) to SUSTRANS specification. Works to include:
The widening of the cycleway to at least 3.0 metres along its length;
The provision of 0.5m lateral clearance from all surrounding vegetation;
Aesthetically pleasing finishing material suitable for predicted usage;
Finished footway level to be higher than adjacent ground to allow for free drainage.
The extension of the Weddington Country Walk northwards from the A5 underpass for a distance of approx. 150 metres with new connecting footway/cycleway links (to a width of 4.0 metres) to MIRA Technology Park and Wood Lane;
The construction of a new bridge over the A444 Weddington Road. Works to include:
A 3.0m wide footway / cycleway on bridge deck with central delineation;
April 2011 ‐ 93 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Approach ramps to be no steeper than 1:20;
1.4m high parapet and 900mm high handrails on both sides of bridge deck;
Provision of anti‐slip / skid surfacing material on bridge deck;
Surface water drainage discharge to avoid spillage onto carriageway below;
Minimum clearance of 5.7m to carriageway of A444 Weddington Road below;
Improved ramp connections to A444 Weddington Road inc. widening to 3.0 metres.
Replacement of field‐track bridge located midway between A5 and A444 – details as above;
9.16 In addition to the above funding would be made available by way of a Section 106 Agreement for the widening of existing footpath from Weddington Junction to Church Lane to form new shared footway / cycleway.
9.17 The improved cycle infrastructure along the A5 corridor between the Redgate junction (A5 / A444) and Higham Lane junction, a total distance of some 2.9 kilometres, comprises the upgrading / widening of existing shared footway / cycleway on the northern side of the main carriageway, improved crossing facilities and signage. In detail these works comprise:
The provision of a 4.0 metre wide shared footway / cycleway along the frontage of the MIRA Technology Park;
The widening of the existing footway along the remaining length between the two junctions, outside of the MIRA Technology Park boundary to between 2.0 metres (minimum) and 3.0 metres (preferable) subject to land ownership;
Improved signage along the length of footway / cycleway inc. links to NCN52;
Improved crossing facilities at the Redgate junction and Higham Lane roundabouts in the form of dropped kerb facilities, safe storage on central islands and improved signage;
The potential closure of the A5 / Wood Lane junction (subject to further discussions with Highway Authorities).
9.18 Figure 9.1 shows the extent of the proposed improvements to off‐site cycle infrastructure as described above.
April 2011 ‐ 94 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 9.1 Off‐Site Cycle Infrastructure Improvements
April 2011 ‐ 95 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9.19 Employees will be provided with mapping of key external cycle routes and on‐site cycle parking facilities as part of the package related to the MIRABike scheme. In addition these details will be posted on the ‘Travel’ page of a dedicated MIRA Technology Park web‐site.
Motorcycling
9.20 As part of the MIRA Technology Park Masterplan it is recognised that motorcycles and mopeds can offer a more sustainable alternative to travel by private car, being more space efficient in terms of parking provision and having less impact in terms of congestion.
9.21 All buildings within the MIRA Technology Park will therefore be provided with motorcycle parking located close to the main pedestrian entrance of the building in accordance with the Leicestershire County Council standards as contained within the document ‘Highways, Transportation & Development – the Leicestershire Guide’ (2005) providing 1 no. motorcycle space plus 1 space per 10 car parking spaces for each land use / building within the development.
9.22 Where feasible motorcycling parking will be covered, lit and signed as well as being located close to the main pedestrian entrances of all buildings. Motorcyclists will also be able to take advantage of the provision for lockers for storage of helmets, changing / drying facilities and showers within all buildings.
9.23 The Travel Plan Coordinator in conjunction with the Working Group representatives will continuously monitor demand for motorcycle parking and review the need for alterations to the proposed level of provision as part of the annual review process.
Public Transport
9.24 Under existing operating conditions the MIRA Technology Park is remote from existing commercial and subsidised bus services given its location. Through extensive discussions with public transport officers at both Leicestershire and Warwickshire County Councils it has been agreed that the most viable option in terms of maximising the opportunities for employees and visitors to use public transport will be to promote a dedicated bus service targeted at the specific requirements of the MIRA Technology Park.
MIRABus
9.25 MIRABus is the concept developed to deliver public transport access to the MIRA Technology Park. MIRABus would use dedicated, branded vehicles to operate a range of demand‐responsive and timetabled services to / from MIRA Technology Park focussed on links with the two major local communities, namely Nuneaton and Hinckley, from which a significant proportion of trip using this mode would originate from.
9.26 MIRABus would utilise vehicles that run on alternative fuel technologies that minimise impact on the environment. The fleet of MIRABus vehicles would mainly deliver two levels of service, namely:
April 2011 ‐ 96 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Morning and evening ‘peak period’ bus services to serve the primarily residential catchment areas of Nuneaton & Hinckley;
Continuous timetabled links throughout the day to Nuneaton & Hinckley railway stations – the timings of which to coincide with arrivals / departures of key rail services to these interchanges.
9.27 In addition to the above MIRABus vehicles would be available outside of morning and evening peak periods to operate on‐demand connections to other key external destinations such as East Midlands and Birmingham airports. Such a facility will be particularly beneficial in terms of transferring visitors, guests and delegates from partners overseas.
9.28 Within MIRA Technology Park a dedicated ‘hub’ will be provided for all MIRABus services adjacent to the village centre in the heart of the development. Additional stops will be provided on the main primary distributor road within the Technology Park. MIRABus stops will be provided with passenger waiting shelters, seating, lighting and timetable information.
9.29 The morning and evening peak period services would serve the key areas of resident population within both Nuneaton and Hinckley from which a substantial proportion of existing and future employees within the MIRA Technology Park reside. At present timetabled commuter services and rail‐links have been devised however a key principle of the MIRABus concept is to maximise flexibility in the form of a more demand‐responsive service that can be changed to reflect the demands / requirements of passengers.
9.30 The implementation of the MIRABus service will be phased as development within the MIRA Technology Park is released however when fully operational up to 5 no. vehicles will form the fleet. The ongoing operating costs will be met by the management structure to be put in place. It will be the decision of the operator as to whether some form of fare revenue will be taken from users to offset the ongoing running costs however any fare levied will be competitive and certainly less than the cost of a comparative car trip.
9.31 Initially two MIRABus commuter routes have been identified to serve the Nuneaton area, both of which would include stops in Nuneaton town centre and the Nuneaton railway station as part of the routing (the latter to tie in with the arrival and departures patterns of rail services).
Route N2, or Nuneaton West Commuter Link, would serve the Hartshill, Chapel End, Camp Hill and St Nicholas Park areas of the town.
Route N3, or Nuneaton South Commuter Link, would serve the Horeston Grange, Attleborough, Heath End, Stockingford and Whittleford Park areas of the town.
9.32 Both routes N2 and N3 could deliver a timetabled 3 no. return services each (6 no. services in total) during the morning and evening peak periods with arrivals at MIRA Technology Park between 0700 and 0900 hours in the morning and departures from MIRA Technology Park between 1600 and 1800 hours in the evening.
April 2011 ‐ 97 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9.33 Throughout the day, route N1 (Nuneaton Rail Link) could deliver a half‐hourly service directly between MIRA Technology Park and Nuneaton railway station (hourly service in the evenings). Route N1 would connect with arrivals and departures of rail services to key destinations such as Birmingham New Street, Coventry, Tamworth, Lichfield Trent Valley, Stafford, Rugby, Northampton, Milton Keynes Central and London Euston.
9.34 Figure 9.2 shows the suggested routing of the MIRABus services to the Nuneaton area.
Figure 9.2 MIRABus ‐ Nuneaton
April 2011 ‐ 98 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
9.35 Two commuter routes have also been identified to serve the Hinckley area, both of which would include stops in the town centre and railway station as part of the routing (the latter to tie in with the arrival and departures patterns of rail services).
Route H2, or Hinckley South Commuter Link, would serve the Sketchley, Sketchley Hill, Burbage and Hollycroft areas of the town as well as Higham‐on‐the‐Hill village.
Route H3, or Hinckley North Commuter Link, would serve the Ashby Road / Barwell Lane, Outlands Drive and Wykin areas of the town as well as Higham‐on‐the‐Hill village.
9.36 Both routes H2 and H3 could deliver a timetabled 2 no. return services each (4 no. services in total) during the morning and evening peak periods with arrivals at MIRA Technology Park between 0700 and 0900 hours in the morning and departures from MIRA Technology Park between 1600 and 1800 hours in the evening.
9.37 Throughout the day, route H1 (Hinckley Rail Link) could deliver an hourly service directly between MIRA Technology Park and Hinckley railway station (hourly service in the evenings). Route H1 would connect with arrivals and departures of rail services to Narborough, South Wigston and Leicester.
9.38 Figure 9.3 shows the suggested routing of the MIRABus services to the Hinckley area.
April 2011 ‐ 99 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Figure 9.3 MIRABus ‐ Hinckley
9.39 All employees will be provided with mapping, timetables and set down / pick up points for MIRABus services in the form of a ‘credit card’ style pull‐out format. In addition this information will be posted on the ‘Travel’ page of a dedicated MIRA Technology Park web‐site. Visitors will also have access to the internet‐based mapping and timetables and could be provided with paper copies on request when either a meeting or event is arranged.
April 2011 ‐ 100 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
10. SECTION 278 AND SECTION 106 MEASURES AND PHASING DISCUSSIONS
10.1 It was clear from the outset that a comprehensive package of traffic and sustainable transport measures would need to be implemented in association with the MIRA Technology Park Masterplan as development within the site comes forward and is occupied in future years. These measures are required first and foremost to ensure that the proposals accord fully with both National and Local Policies, but also to ensure that the travel demand that is associated with the development is acceptable and can be accommodated from operational, safety and environmental standpoints.
10.2 It was also clear that any physical works that fall within the A5 (T) corridor for example, the MIRA access, or the improvement measures to the offsite junctions will need to be implemented under a Section 278 Agreement. This agreement would also set out the triggers for various Trunk Road associated improvement measures based on development floorarea/uses and traffic generation.
10.3 Similarly, those traffic and transport measures that fall outside the Trunk Road boundary (improvements to cycle tracks, bus infrastructure and provision, the Travel Plan etc) would be incorporated with all the other planning conditions and obligations within a Section 106 Agreement. As with the Section 278 Agreement, the Section 106 agreement would identify certain triggers of development, at which point additional measures would need to be implemented.
10.4 Within this section, the various Section 278 and Section 106 traffic and transport related measures are identified. It should be noted that the traffic measures (S278 and S106) have been established through the results and analysis of the modelling exercise and the sustainable transport and travel plan related measures through consultation with Warwickshire and Leicestershire County Councils and SUSTRANS.
10.5 It should be noted that the proposed measures for inclusion within the respective agreements are proposed to mitigate traffic impact and meet sustainable transport objectives, but first will need to be agreed with all relevant parties before any development can commence within the site.
Section 278 Agreement Measures
10.6 At this stage it is evident that the Section 278 Agreement would need to incorporate the following measures that would be funded by the MIRA Applicants:
Both the main MIRA roundabout access and left in /left out access on the A5(T) with associated widening to dual carriageway
Provision of 2 bus laybys and pedestrian crossings in the vicinity of the main access roundabout
All required highway landscaping, signing, lining and lighting on the A5(T) in the vicinity of the access
Provision of the shared cycle/pedestrian route along the entire MIRA site frontage to the A5(T)
April 2011 ‐ 101 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Improvements to the existing pedestrian/cycle route on the A5(T) northside between the MIRA site and the A444 Redgate junction to the west and the Higham Roundabout to the east
Major improvements to the Redgate Junction to convert the existing staggered T arrangement to an elongated roundabout/gyratory with associated pedestrian/cyclist measures
Major improvements to the Dodwells Junction to include its signalisation, construction of an A5(T) eastbound through lane and associated geometric improvements and pedestrian facilities
Improvements to the A47/A5 Long Shoot signalised junction
Improvements to the main side road approaches to the A5 Higham Roundabout
Alterations to the existing Wood Lane /A5(T) junction to create a simple Left in/Left Out arrangement
The access arrangements for the MIRA zone and the proposed offsite mitigation measures are indicated on Plan 4.
Phasing Discussion
10.7 The results of the modelling exercise indicate that the above measures would need to be implemented as certain percentages or areas of the MIRA Technology Park development are implemented and occupied.
10.8 The modelling assumptions for this TA were based on 2015, 2018 and 2021 future years with 30%, 60% and 100% occupancy by these dates. In reality the actual speed and timing of development take up is unknown.
10.9 For this reason, the S278 agreement will need to identify which particular measures will need to be implemented prior to, and then once more than say 50,000m2 of the development is occupied. Matters are complicated in that both B1B and to a far lesser extent, B1A uses are proposed and it will be necessary to apply agreed rates to the actual development that transpires in order to establish the appropriate trigger, For example, if no B1 office space is implemented (14,000m2 assumed in the Masterplan) then if B1B is implemented instead then the agreement will need to indicate the appropriate trip rate conversion factor to enable one to fix upon and agree the corresponding level of B1B uses (nb this will be around 3 times greater as B1B generates significantly less traffic than B1A).
10.10 Based on the current model runs and results the following measures are required on the basis of the simple triggers indicated above:
10.11 On day 1 there will be the need to implement the left in/left out access to serve MIRA. The cycle track in front of the development would also be desirable. The improvements to Wood Lane would also assist safety and free flow.
April 2011 ‐ 102 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
10.12 Once 60% of the development is developed then there is a requirement to implement the MIRA roundabout plus A5 dualling. At the same time, the Redgate, Longshoot and Dodwells junctions along the A5 will all require improvement as indicated in previous sections. By this stage the cycle/pedestrian route enhancements along the A5 to the Redgate and Higham Roundabout will need to have been implemented.
10.13 By the time the development is fully implemented then the Higham Roundabout will also need to have been improved.
10.14 It should be noted that the above measures would be triggered and implemented along the Trunk Roads as other measures within the Section 106 Agreement are also implemented.
Section 106 Agreement
10.15 As indicated above, all those sustainable transport measures that fall outside the physical works to the Trunk Road will be implemented under a Section 106 Agreement with the Local Planning Authority.
10.16 At this stage a significant package of physical infrastructure and service provision measures have been devised for inclusion within a Section 106 Agreement. In summary these measures are as follows:
enhancements to the Weddington Lane cycle route through to Nuneaton North
implementation of a Framework Travel Plan for all occupiers within the MIRA site
implementation of 6 MIRAbus routes to run between the site and Hinckley and Nuneaton throughout the day
implementation of MIRA Bike facilities within the site to minimise car travel between the uses.
Phasing Discussions
10.17 As with the Section 278 Agreement there will need to be a clear indication withi the S106 as to what measures would be implemented once certain development triggers or thresholds are exceeded.
10.18 At this stage, it is proposed that the following sustainable transport measures are implemented as development comes forward and is occupied:
Day 1 ‐ 30% development
3 MIRAbus routes to route via Hinckley and Nuneaton
Cycle facilities and MIRA Bikes
60% development
April 2011 ‐ 103 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
2 Additional MIRAbus routes
Upgrading of the Weddington Lane Sustrans Route
60% ‐ 100% development
Upgraded cycle route –A5 northside (to Redgate/Higham junctions)
April 2011 ‐ 104 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
11. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
11.1 MIRA are proposing to expend their existing development and facilities on their site adjacent to the A5 (T) to create a Technology Park. Once completed this facility will offer a total of around 165,000m2 of employment floorspace that will accommodate over 3000 existing and new employees, contractors and clients.
11.2 A majority of this floorspace will be new, whilst a small proportion (around 24,000m2) will replace existing space that will be demolished over time.
11.3 A Masterplan development concept has been devised over a period of time, and is now the subject of an Outline Planning Application. Whilst most matters will be reserved, the issue of site access will not be. Accordingly a Transport Assessment has therefore been prepared in support of the Application to demonstrate that the proposed scale and type of uses can firstly be feasibly served from the A5(T), secondly be accessible by non car models, and thirdly will not given rise to operational and safety problems on the surrounding road network.
11.4 Prior to the preparation of the TA, meetings took place with the Highways Agency and County Councils and the scope of the necessary modelling and TA was agreed. The TA that has been prepared therefore takes the agreed scope fully into account.
11.5 It was agreed from the outset that given the scale and location of the development adjacent to the A5 (T),that the assessments would need to be based on the updated Nuneaton and Hinckley Area Wide PARAMICS Traffic Model. It was also agreed that the assessments of the effectiveness of any access and traffic and transport mitigation measures would also need to be assessed on this basis with the aiming of achieving ‘nil detriment’ at least on the Trunk Road.
11.6 Implementation of sustainable transport measures were identified as being a critical factor given the complete lack of provision for MIRA at present, and the requirement to reduce future travel demand by car.
11.7 In light of this background, a comprehensive TA has been prepared based on an extensive modelling exercise and the following conclusions have been arrived at.
Existing site conditions
11.8 The existing development on the site amounts to around 44,000m2 in area and consist of a mix of office and R+D uses, along with a Proving Ground. This entire facility is currently provided with a single point of access on the A5.
11.9 Traffic surveys indicate the MIRA development and the 878 existing parking spaces generate around 260 car movements in peak hours. Surveys also indicate that the existing traffic routes 65%/35% Eeast/West on the A5 (T) and these flows are then further dissipated as it passes through the 4‐5 main junctions
April 2011 ‐ 105 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
that are located on the A5 both in the directions of the M69 and M42. The site is not currently served by public transport.
Future conditions
11.10 There are no plans in the short to medium term by the Highways Agency to improve any of the junctions on the A5 (T). Although in the past the HA had considered options for the Redgate and Longshoot/Dodwells junctions, but these are in no programme due to funding constraints.
11.11 No improvements to bus provision are planned in this area.
11.12 Traffic flows on the A5 (T) are likely to increase as a result of general traffic growth and new residential development that are proposed adjacent to Nuneaton and Hinckley in future years.
Development proposals
11.13 The Masterplan proposal for the MIRA Technology Park includes the following uses:
Existing MIRA Uses (retained) ‐ 22,302m2
Use Class B1(b) Research & Development ‐ 118,413m2
Use Class B1(a) Offices ‐ 14,303m2
Use Class C3 Hotel ‐ 4,500m2 (100 beds)
Use Class A1 Local Retail Facilities ‐ 500m2
Use Class A3 Restaurants ‐ 1,000m2
Use Class D2 Leisure ‐ 1,000m2
11.14 It should be noted that over 22,300m2 of the Proving Ground uses will remain and the remaining existing MIRA uses (24,000m2) would be demolished and ultimately subsumed within the new development in future.
11.15 Based on surveys and TRICS data it has been concluded that the development once completed would generate between 864 and 998 additional vehicle movements on the proposed accesses in the critical peak hours (08.00‐09.00, 17.00‐18.00).
11.16 For the purpose of the TA it has been assumed that 30% of the development (and trips) would be occupied by 2013, 60% by 2018 and 100% by 2021. In reality, the take up rate is not known and the above assumptions could be different either way.
April 2011 ‐ 106 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
11.17 It was agreed from the outset that this traffic would route onto the A5 (T) and beyond on the same basis of the routings that were derived from the existing employee journey to work surveys.
MIRA A5 Access Measures
11.18 A number of access options were devised and tested prior to the modelling exercise, and it was concluded that the most suitable arrangement would consist of a main roundabout access coupled with a left in left out (LiLo) arrangement to the west. In this way the main access roundabout that was proposed would remain in capacity and the LiLo access arrangement would not interrupt the freeflow of traffic on the A5.
11.19 The section of A5 (T) in between the two access junctions would be widened to provide dual carriageway. This arrangement provides the necessary capacity and minimises impact on A5 freeflows.
Sustainable Transport Measures
11.20 A package of measures has been agreed with the County Councils which include:
Buses (6 Routes) (Hinckley/Nuneaton and Railways stations links
Bus laybys on the A5 and in the site
CycleRoutes (offsite)
Cycle Routes and facilities (onsite)
Pedestrians/ onsite‐offsite
Framework Travel Plan – car share etc; facilities
11.21 Full implementation of these measures would result in at least 20% reduction in car use associated with the MIRA development. As with the traffic measures, these measures would be implemented once agreed development area thresholds are exceeded.
Approach to Development Traffic Impact Modelling
11.22 In the first instance JMP were requested to review the results of the Audit of the existing Hinckley and Nuneaton model and address the concerns that were raised. The aim of this exercise was to get to the point where a “fit for purpose” model could be agreed with the Highways Agency and County Councils. At the same time, the model routes were extended (+3) and the model was recalibrated/re validated for the 2008 base situation.
April 2011 ‐ 107 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
11.23 Upon reaching agreement with all interested parties JMP then set up and ran the model for the 2011, 2015, 2018 and 2021 Baseline situations, allowing for growth and committed developments. The model runs covered the AM and PM peak periods (3+3 hours).
11.24 Having obtained the Baseline (without development) model results, JMPP then ran the model again for the following situations:
Do Minimum: with MIRA development phases (2015/2018/2021)
Do Something: with MIRA development phases (2015/2018/2021)
Do Something + Sustainable Transport Measures: with MIRA development phases (2015/2018/2021)
Model Results and Analysis
2011 Baseline
11.25 This was run with the existing MIRA flows and network conditions. Some queues were observed to build on the approaches to a number of junctions on the A5 ,most notably the and Higham, and Dodwells Junctions.
2015‐2021 Baseline
11.26 During this period the network performance progressively reduces and junctions on the A5 experience increasing queues and delays. The key problem junctions identified included the Redgate (A444 approaches), Wood lane (Wood Lane and A5 E approach), Higham Roundabout (Nuneaton and Higham lane approaches) and both the Long Shoot and Dodwells Junctions (all approaches).
2015‐2021 Do Minimum
11.27 With these scenarios the MIRA traffic impact was observed to be significant, once 60% of the development was built out. The key problems included Redgate, the MIRA access, Longshout, Dodwells and Wood Lane junctions. In 2021 the situation at Higham Roundabout had also deteriorated. .
2015‐2021 Do Something
11.28 With these scenarios, traffic mitigation measures were devised for the “problem junctions” that had been identified when analysing the DM model results. The junctions and measures included:
Redgate: conversion from a staggered T junction to a simple gyratory system.
MIRA access: acceleration of the access construction such that complete scheme including dualling was in place by 2018.
April 2011 ‐ 108 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Wood Lane: conversion from an all movements T junction to a LiLo arrangement.
Higham Roundabout: improvements to the Higham Lane and Nuneaton Lane approaches
A47 Long Shoot Junction: improvements to the existing signalised junction
Dodwells: Signalisation of the existing roundabout, provision of an eastbound through lane on the A5 and improvements and widening to the entrance/exit tapers
11.29 The model was again run for this Do Something situation with the mitigation measures for all 3 future years and network conditions were observed to improve over the DM situation. However, increased queues when compared with the 2018 and 2021 reference situations were still evident at the Long Shoot, Dodwells and Higham junctions despite the improvement measures. This was also leading to rerouting through and onto the A5 by way of the Nutts Lane.
11.30 At the same time, the additional delays on some of the 10 selected routes within the model area were still quite significant(in excess of 3 minutes on the A5 west section)
2021 Do Something + Public transport
11.31 For this particular scenario the trips generated to/from the Hinckley/Nuneaton zones were adjusted to reflect the introduction of the 5 bus services that are proposed to link these settlements and the railway stations with the MIRA site. The results of this exercise indicated further improvements to conditions at the Dodwells and Higham Roundabout when compared with the DM runs. Importantly also, it was evident that peak conditions were broadly no worse than for the reference situation. Indeed at some junctions there was some overall improvement .
Network impact beyond the modelled boundary
11.32 Up to 18% of MIRA development traffic will route westwards on the A5 (T) beyond the current model boundary and in the direction of the M42 intersection. This development traffic could potentially impact on junction operation in this corridor. However, the results of the model for the A5 at its western boundary indicated that the actual levels of flow increase on this section of the A5 and beyond in the direction of the M42 ranged between 3‐5% in peaks.
11.33 It was also evident that this percentage increase in flow would dissipate the further one would travel west through the 4 junctions that are located on this section of the A5 in the direction of the M42, with traffic turning off at each of these junctions.
11.34 Given this situation, it was concluded that the flow increase were not considered material enough to warrant further investigation of junction operation.
April 2011 ‐ 109 ‐
MIRA Technology Park Transport Assessment
Overall Conclusions Of The Modelling And TA Exercise
11.35 The overall conclusion of the modelling and TA exercise was that whilst the MIRA access proposals would operate satisfactorily, the impact of the full MIRA Technology Park as proposed would have a material impact on the operation of a number of key junctions on the A5 both to the east and west of the site during peak periods.
11.36 Implementation of the traffic mitigation measures alone to address the problems went some way to resolve the situation, but it was evident that conditions at the Longshoot, Dodwells and Higham Lane Junctions would still worsen when compared with the reference situations.
11.37 However, once the modelling exercise took the sustainable transport measures that are planned with the development into account, then the results indicated that conditions were broadly no worse than for the comparable 2021 Reference situations.
11.38 With the support of these proposed traffic and transport measures the development proposals therefore meet all relevant transport and sustainability objectives and policies.
April 2011 ‐ 110 ‐