Download - Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
1/89
Telford FutureLocal Action forSustainable Growth
December 2011
Forecasting ReportQ30061/VAA/FR
Submitted by Pell Frischmannon behalf of
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
2/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
This report is to be regarded as confidential to our Client and it is intended for their use only and may not beassigned. Consequently and in accordance with current practice, any liability to any third party in respect ofthe whole or any part of its contents is hereby expressly excluded. Before the report or any part of it isreproduced or referred to in any document, circular or statement and before its contents or the contents ofany part of it are disclosed orally to any third party, our written approval as to the form and context of such apublication or disclosure must be obtained
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Telford and Wrekin CouncilEnvironment & Regeneration,
Network Management & Policy
Darby House
PO Box 212
Lawn Court, Telford
Shropshire TF3 4LB
Pell Frischmann9-10 Frederick Road
BirminghamB15 1JD
REVISION RECORD Report Ref:Rev Description Date Originator Checked Approved
A Draft Nov 2011 LA SW GTB Draft Final Nov 2011 LA SW GTC Final Dec 2011 LA SW GT
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
3/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 11.1 OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 11.2 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................... 11.3 CONSIDERATION FOR FUTURE DEMAND AND NETWORK ......................... 31.4 SCHEME OPTIONS ......................................................................................... 31.5 TRAFFIC MODEL BACKGROUND ................................................................... 41.4 OUTLINE METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 41.6 CONTENTS OF REPORT ................................................................................ 71.7 REFERENCE DOCUMENTATION.................................................................... 7
2. FUTURE YEAR MODEL SCENARIO ......................................................................... 8
2.1
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 8
2.2 FORECAST NETWORKS ................................................................................. 82.3 NETWORK CODING ........................................................................................ 8
3. FUTURE YEAR MATRIX DEVELOPMENT .............................................................. 103.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 103.2 FORECAST MODEL TIME PERIODS ............................................................ 103.3 FORECAST REFERENCE CASE TRIP MATRICES ....................................... 113.4 MATRIX BUILDING METHOD ........................................................................ 113.5 TEMPRO GROWTH ....................................................................................... 123.6 COMMITTED DEVELOPMENT TRIPS ........................................................... 133.7 UNCERTAINTY .............................................................................................. 22
3.8 COMBINATION OF MATRICES ..................................................................... 233.9 CONSTRAINING TO TEMPRO ...................................................................... 233.10 PUBLIC TRANSPORT FORECAST ................................................................ 26
4. TRAFFIC FORECASTING RESULTS ...................................................................... 304.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 304.2 VARIABLE DEMAND MODELLING ................................................................ 344.3 FORECAST CONVERGENCE ........................................................................ 344.4 DEMAND RESPONSE FOR CAR ................................................................... 36
5. HIGHWAY NETWORK PERFORMANCE ................................................................ 425.1 NETWORK PERFORMANCE ......................................................................... 42
6. PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK PERFORMANCE .............................................. 54
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................... 607.1 SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 607.2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 60
APPENDICESAppendix A TEMPRO Forecast for Cars and Public TransportAppendix B Committed Development Trips EmploymentAppendix C Committed Development Trips Residential
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
4/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
5/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
1.1.1 Pell Frischmann has been commissioned by Telford and Wrekin Council (T&WC)to use the recently completed VISUM Strategic transport model for Telford. The
model has been used to generate traffic forecasts to aid in the assessment of the
Telford Future scheme. The model traffic forecasts will be used in the economic
assessment of the scheme which is seeking funding from the DfT.
1.1.2 The model is intended to replace and update the existing strategic model with new
data and multi-modal capability. The model incorporates the Public Transport
services and the M54 as the strategic route enabling access to wider catchment in
the West Midlands Region.
1.1.3 This report describes the methods and process undertaken in preparing the traffic
forecasts derived from the 2009 Telford Strategic Model. The details of the 2009
Telford Strategic Model, its calibration and validation are described in the Telford
Strategic Transport Model - Phase 3 - Local Model Validation Report.
1.2 Study Area
1.2.1 Telford is a large town in the borough of Telford and Wrekin. The town has grown
from being a fledgling New Town to become a successful and thriving town of
over 140,000 people, with a wider Telford & Wrekin population of around 165,000
1.2.2 Telford is expected to grow rapidly in the next 20 years with an additional 25,000
homes and as a key sub-regional centre where office and retail growth will be
directed.
1.2.3 The study area that is encompassed in the model is shown on Figure 1.1.
1.2.4 Telfords strategic road network is based upon three roads, the town is bisected
east-west by the M54 Motorway with the A442 and A5223 forming a ring around
the conurbation. This ring distributes traffic to the districts that make up the widercommunity.
1.2.5 The town is served by four Junctions on the M54 motorway:
! Junction 4 is on the east side of the conurbation and primarily provides
access to the east end of Stafford Park and to the A442 to the south of the
town and the local districts of Priorslee and Saint Georges via the B5060 to
the north;
! Junction 5 provides access to the Town Centre;
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
6/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
! Junction 6 is on the west side of the conurbation providing access to
Wellington and Hadley in the North and Lawley and Dawley in the south via
the A5223; and.
! Junction 7 is some distance to the west and forms the change of the main
route from motorway to the A5 all purpose dual carriageway. This junction
also provides access to the west side of Wellington.
Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. License No 100004912
Figure 1.1: Study Area
1.2.6 Junction 5 of the M54 takes the form of two separate sets of slip roads thatconnect at a single off set roundabout, known as Forge Roundabout. Forge
Roundabout suffers considerable peak period congestion. This is particularly a
problem for the east bound exit slip in the AM peak and for Rampart Way, Forge
Gate and Hall Park Way in the PM peak period.
1.2.7 Hollinswood Interchange is a grade separated junction over the A442 laid out
originally as a large roundabout, but is now mostly signal controlled. As well as
the slip roads to the A442 and the link to Forge Roundabout via Rampart Way,
there is also a link directly to the town centre via Hollinsgate, an access road to
the rail station car park and main bus/rail interchange, an access road to StaffordPark, a major employment centre, and a seventh arm the A5 Telford Way.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
7/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Congestion occurs on all arms of the junction in both peak periods, particularly as
the amount of stacking space on the circulating carriageway is limited, which in
turn limits the efficient operation of the junction.
1.2.8 The main highways into Telford town centre are high capacity two way roads
which lead to a 3 lane wide, one way system which encircles the main shopping
area (referred to as the box roadit includes Coach Central, Woodhouse Centre,
Lawn Central and Grange Central).
1.3 Consideration for Future Demand and Network
1.3.1 An earlier consideration identified 26,500 new houses for Telford as part of
Regional Spatial Strategy, which was subsequently abolished. The development
of the Local Development Framework (LDF) will identify the options and numbers
for housing.
1.3.2 Central Telford Area Action Plan (CTAAP) adopted in March 2011 forecasts major
employment growth in the Town Centre. The associated locations identified in the
CTAAP documents are considered in the development of the model.
1.3.3 Local Transport Plan 3 development is also taking place which sets out the
transport interventions. The CTAAP network improvements, likely future
Greyhound Link development and potential other network improvements
associated with the Borough are also considered in the base model development.
1.4 Scheme Options
1.4.1 Telford and Wrekin Council have produced a strategy aimed at promoting bus,
pedestrian and cyclist movements and slowing down traffic in and around the
town centre. This will reduce journey times and improve the accessibility of the
town centre by pedestrians and cyclists, resulting in healthier life styles, lower
carbon footprint of the town, and increased capacity of the town centre access
roads.
1.4.2 The proposals include the following elements:
! Improvements to Forge and Malinslee Roundabouts;
! Changes to traffic circulation measures - introduction of a two-way system
around the town centre;
! Junction, pedestrian and cyclist movement improvements; and
! Introduction of a shared vehicle-cyclist-pedestrian area.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
8/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
1.4.3 The proposed transport scheme will facilitate the delivery of the Central Telford
Area Action Plan (CTAAP), as adopted by the Council in March 2011, setting out
a strategy and policies for development in the town centre.
1.5 Traffic Model Background
1.5.1 Previously, a SATURN model was developed by Atkins for T&WC in association
with English Partnerships. The Atkins model developed in 2002 for Telford was
based on 2001 Road Side Interview data.
1.5.2 A Strategic Highway Model was developed for Telford by Jacobs in December
2007. The Strategic Highway model was developed using the VISUM package.
The network and matrices from the previously developed SATURN were updated
by Jacobs. More recent data was also used to develop the Jacobs VISUM model.
1.5.3 The 2007 VISUM model was developed for the AM and PM peak only, there was
no model developed for the inter-peak period, a requirement for a Major Scheme
Business Case. The model was not multi-modal and had no Variable Demand
Model element.
1.5.4 The approaching LTP, LDF and the potential for a Major Scheme Business Case
(MSBC), together with the need for multi-modal ability, a WebTAG requirement,
necessitates the re-development of the existing VISUM model. Amongst others,
the requirement was to produce a multi-modal model with a far more detailedzoning system to enable assessment of LDF options and provide a tool for LTP
assessment and future MSBC requirements.
1.4 Outline Methodology
1.5.5 This Forecasting Report describes the development and results of a demand
forecast of land use in 2015 and 2030 using the Telford Transport Models (TTM).
The TTM include a demand model (TDN), a highways model (THM) and a public
transport model (TPTM). The modelling approach takes future year developments
and changes in transport provision and produces forecasts of highway and publictransport demand.
1.5.6 As such, the Telford Transport Model will be able to:
! Identify the impact on the transport network of locating development in each
of the strategic residential and employment sites;
! Identify the potential for maximising the use of public transport for movements
to from sites;
! Identify the potentially significant switches in travel patterns arising from major
changes in employment type and location;
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
9/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
! Support the District Council through the Local Development Framework (LDF)
process and any subsequent statutory processes.
1.5.7 The development of the forecast matrices for the TTM can be summarised in the
following tasks:
! Background Growth;
! Development Trips;
! Combination of Matrices; and
! Constraining to TEMPRO.
1.5.8
1.5.9 In summary, the main elements of the forecasting procedure are as follows:
! Produce base year 2009 AM/IP/PM calibrated models;
! Identify forecast years and traffic growth parameters (most likely case);
! Calculate any background growth of existing vehicle trips and apply to matrix;
! Assess planning data and quantify development-related trips to and from
specific model zones;
! Define future year highway networks;
! Calculate variable demand parameters (i.e. elasticity of demand);
! Undertake variable trip matrix VISUM assignment; and
! Analyse model outputs.
1.5.10 Traffic flow outputs and network performance will vary between forecast years,
growth scenarios, time periods and with/without scheme situations. The report will
show and explain why any major variations are expected to occur.
Future Year Model Development
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
10/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
1.5.11 The development of the future year model relates to projecting changes in travel
demand and supply into the future. The base year model provides the starting
point for each element of these projections.
1.5.12 Future year travel demand relates to factoring the base year trip matrix in relation
to projected growth in travel demand. The Department for Transport (DfT)
provides national based forecasts via published summaries of traffic growth from
its National Transport Model (NTM) split into several vehicle types. Additionally,
the DfT provides localised projections for personal trips including cars via its
software suite TEMPRO. This suite encapsulates a range of responses that drive
changes in traffic levels, including car ownership, population, employment,
number of households, etc.
1.5.13 TEMPROs spatial detail although more localised than NTM, is still relatively
coarse for detailed modelling, with traffic growth factors typically split into several
areas for each local authority district. The software does include an adjustment
process to identify specific developments and exclude them from the wider traffic
growth factors to enable the use of development specific trip rates and
distributions.
1.5.14 Future year travel supply relates to updating the highway network to represent the
future year both withand withoutthe proposed road improvementscheme. The
without improvements network, known as the Do Nothing (DN), includes other
committed changes to the network which are planned to be delivered irrespective
of the scheme going ahead. The withimprovements network, known as the Do
Something (DS), includes the same committed schemes as in the Do Nothing plus
the scheme.
Traffic Forecasts
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
11/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
1.5.15 The traffic forecasts developed for the study have been undertaken by assigning
the forecast trip matrices to the DN and DS networks within the VISUM software
suite.
1.5.16 The assignment process allows route choice, so the provision of the scheme in
the DS network may open up a new route onto which traffic re-assigns onto, if the
new route has lower trip costs than the existing routes. As a consequence of
traffic diverting to the scheme travel costs on existing routes change and are
generally lower due to reduced congestion on the existing routes
1.6 Contents of Report
1.6.1 This document provides a report of the methods and processes used in the
development of the traffic forecasts using the Telford Strategic model. The report
follows the approach previously outlined and is split into two chapters, as follows:
! Chapter 2 Future Year Model Scenarios; and
! Chapter 3 - Traffic Forecasts.
1.6.2 The report is concluded with Chapter 4, this summarises the forecast modelling
process and provides a conclusion on the robustness of the model for use in
assessing economic benefits of the scheme.
1.7 Reference Documentation
1.7.1 The following documents have been referenced in the development of the traffic
forecasts using the Telford Strategic Model:
! Transport Analysis Guidance (WebTAG) Department for Transport;
! Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DNRB), Volume 12 - Traffic Appraisal
of Road Schemes - Department for Transport;
! Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DNRB), Volume 13 - Economic
Assessment of Road Schemes - Department for Transport;
! Guidance Note for Traffic Consultants Employed on Highways Agency
Schemes, Interim Advice Note 106/08 - Highways Agency; and
! VISUM 11.5 User Manual PTV, September 2010.
1.7.2 These documents have been referenced during the process. However, for clarity
the guidance given in these documents has been referenced only when it aids in
understanding the process. The guidance has been used too frequently for it to
be referenced at each instance of use, since this would clutter the report,
hindering the discussion and descriptions given. Where the reader requires
further clarity on the use of these references in the study please contact theauthor.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
12/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
2. FUTURE YEAR MODEL SCENARIO
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 This section describes the methods used in the development of the future yearhighway network and the travel demand matrices using the TTM. This includes a
description of the changes to the model network to represent the Do Nothing (DN)
and Do something (DS) schemes and forecasting processes used to produce
future year travel demand trip matrices.
2.1.2 Traffic forecasts have been produced for various scenarios. The scenarios
comprise a combination of assessment years, model time periods, traffic growth
conditions and highway network options.
2.1.3 As an input to this process, the compilation of network options for the futurescenarios are summarised in Section 2.2. Similarly, the full growth, reference
case, trip matrix production for each forecast scenario is detailed in Sections 3.
2.2 Forecast Networks
2.2.1 The assessment process is based on considering the differences in traffic impacts
from comparing trips assigned to the DN and DS networks with fixed and variable
demand.
2.2.2 The Do Nothing network required no modification to the base year network wasundertaken.
2.2.3 The Do Something network required the following modifications:
! Improvements to Forge and Malinslee Roundabouts;
! Changes to traffic circulation measures - introduction of a two-way system
around the town centre;
! Junction, pedestrian and cyclist movement improvements; and
! Introduction of a shared vehicle-cyclist-pedestrian area Coach Central.
2.2.4 The growth assumptions used are described in Section 3.5 of this report.
2.3 Network Coding
2.2.5 The coding of the Do Something network into the VISUM model simulation model
was based on estimating junction capacity related to the physical layout of the
intersections. This process was based on the calculation of VISUM saturation
flows (capacities) using the ARCADY, TRANSYT and PICADY formula in the
following Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) reports:
! Signalised junctions TRL Research Report 67;
!
Roundabout junctions
TRL Research Report 36;! Priority Junctions, Opposed movements TRL Research Report 35; and
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
13/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
! Priority Junctions, Unopposed movements TRL Research Report 67.
2.3.1 The modifications to the network included new traffic signals at existing junctions.
In addition to layout information the VISUM model requires signal timings for each
stage within the signal cycle. These signal timings were initially estimated fromthe base year traffic flows at the relevant junction. These were then used in
calibration forecast assignments, and were adjusted to reflect future year travel
demand. In general, this related to adjustment of stage lengths in the opening
year, while in the design year cycle times were generally extended with stage
lengths adjusted appropriately. However, at the Forge junction the traffic signals
are to be MOVA controlled
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
14/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
3. FUTURE YEAR MATRIX DEVELOPMENT
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 In determining future year traffic forecasts the following has been reviewed: theLocal Transport Plan 3 (LTP3), which includes recent traffic growth patterns within
the authority, and the CTAAP which shows committed development proposals
within the town centre.
3.1.2 The core traffic growth scenario proposed assumes an opening year assessment
of 2015 including committed development. This scenario reflects small growth
being observed in the town centre but it also show that the committed
developments identified, which are reviewed in Section 4.2 of this report, are of a
significant size and influence. Thus, the core testing scenario is the opening year
of 2015 with committed developments identified constrained to TEMPRO growth.
Matrices have also been developed for the Design Year of 2030 constrained to
TEMPRO growth.
3.2 Forecast Model Time Periods
3.2.1 Modelled time periods for the traffic forecasts have been retained from the base
2009 Base model, namely:
! AM peak hour (08:00-09:00);
! PM peak hour (17:00-18:00); and! Inter peak hour (10:00-16:00).
3.2.2 The future Model forecast years have been selected to be 2015 and 2030.
Forecasts have been produced for the DN and DS network.
3.2.3 In line with appraisal guidance, traffic growth from base year 2009 has been
accounted for in all of the model forecasts. Traffic growth is considered to be
inevitable in response to economic and demographic change.
3.2.4 Initially, the above scenario has been forecast as full-growth for each future yearand time period. This full growth represents conditions that would prevail in
future, if vehicle users did not adjust their trip patterns in response to changes in
road congestion and their ease of travel. However, the forecasts have
subsequently been adjusted to allow for such variable trip matrix effects (induced
and suppressedtraffic).
3.2.5 The determinants of the growth scenario are as follows:
! TEMPRO local area planning data;
!
DfT 2009 Road forecast for England! Site-specific development proposals; and
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
15/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
! Road infrastructure schemes.
3.3 Forecast Reference Case Trip Matrices
3.3.1 The need to forecast growth in car, public transport, light and heavy goodsvehicles trip ends from 2009 to 2015 and 2030 is termed background growth. In
order to calculate the vehicle and public transport forecast trip ends, TEMPRO
(v6.2) has been used to obtain growth forecasts. However in order to more
realistically reflect projected land use changes, travel demand growth has been
distributed throughout the area using more detailed local planning data supplied
by the T&WC.
3.3.2 In this section, there is a summary of how the full-growth reference case all-
vehicle trip matrices have been constructed for each of the forecast situations.
These full growth matrices have been derived from the 2009 base year calibrated
AM peak, Inter peak and PM peak models, but with adjustments made to take
account of the following:
! Background growth of existing trips after 2009 in response to demographic
economic, as predicted in TEMPRO and NTM forecast; and
! Zone-specific land use committed development as per planning permission
registered by planning authorities.
3.4 Matrix Building Method
3.4.1 Future year matrices have been produced by applying separate forecasting
techniques to different parts of the 2009 base matrix and by then combining the
constituent parts. Key stages in the matrix forecasting, for 2015 and 2030
forecast year and time period, were as follows:
! 2009 Base matrix by journey purpose as a starting point;
! Separation of car and LGV matrices into longer distance (strategic) traffic and
local shorter distance (internal) traffic;
! Calculation of TEMPRO background growth factors by journey purpose;
! Application of TEMPRO background growth to cars and LGV for internaltraffic only;
! Calculation of strategic traffic growth factors using NTM forecast;
! Application of strategic traffic growth factors to strategic, longer distance car
and LGV trips;
! Application of strategic traffic growth factors to heavy vehicle trips;
! Addition of land use development trips to the cars, LGV and HGV matrices
after factoring for background growth; and
! Derivation of trip origins and destinations at key land use developments.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
16/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
3.4.2 Details of the various stages of matrix building are set out in the following
sections.
3.5 TEMPRO Growth
3.5.1 The factors have been derived from TEMPRO 6.2 and without modification by fuel
and income factors for use in a highway model as recommended by guidance.
The mean of the Originsand Destinationsbackground growth factors have been
presented by TEMPRO zones as shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: TEMPRO zones in Telford and Wrekin
3.5.2 The seven TEMPRO zones representing the key study area of Telford are:
! Rural area of Telford and Wrekin;
! Newport;
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
17/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
! Oakengates and Donnington;
! Telford;
! Ironbridge and Madeley;
!
Hadley; and! Wellington.
3.5.3 TEMPRO factors were not adjusted for fuel and income effects (as advised in
WebTag 3.15.2). TEMPRO Growth factors applied to the validated 2009 Base
Year matrix are shown in Appendix A by peak period, journey purpose and
TEMPRO zone.
Strategic Longer Distance Traffic Growth between 2009 and 2015 and 2030
3.5.4 Growth rates derived from the DfT 2009 Road Forecasts for England were used to
forecast car, LGV and HGV for strategic movements. The growth factors for 2009
to 2015 and 2030 are shown in Table 3.1.
Future year Car LGV OGV1/OGV2
2015 1.0149 1.1404 1.0365
2030 1.2635 1.5974 1.1492
Table 3.1: Growth Factors Based on 2009 Road Forecasts for England
3.5.5 Overall, full growth, all-vehicle, trip matrices for 2015 and 2030, time period and
growth scenario were produced, by combining the internal cars and LGV trips,
strategic cars, LGV and HGV trips as well as development trips for cars, LGV and
HGV trips.
3.6 Committed Development Trips
3.6.1 In accordance with WebTAG 3.15.5 The Treatment of Uncertainty in Model
Forecasting and following consultation with TWC, we have developed an
Uncertainty Log, which identified the proposed developments within the study
area and attaches a level of uncertainty. This is reproduced from the Guidance in
Table 3.2below.
Probability of the Input Status
Near Certain:The outcome will happen or thereis a high probability that it willhappen.
! Intent announced by proponent to regulatoryagencies;
! Approved development proposals; and
! Projects under construction.
More than likely:The outcome is likely to happenbut there is some uncertainty.
! Submission of planning or consent applicationimminent; and
! Development application within the consentprocess.
Reasonably Foreseeable:The outcome may happen, but
! Identified within a development plan;! Not directly associated with the transport
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
18/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Probability of the Input Status
there is significant uncertainty. strategy/scheme, but may occur if thestrategy/scheme is implemented;
! Development conditional upon the transportstrategy/scheme proceeding; and
! Or a committed policy goal, subject to testswhose outcomes are subject to significantuncertainty.
Hypothetical:There is considerable uncertaintywhether the outcome will everhappen.
! Conjecture based upon currently availableinformation;
! Discussed on a conceptual basis;
! One of a number of possible inputs in an initialconsultation process; and
! Or a policy aspiration.Table 3.2: Classification of Future Inputs
3.6.2 The Core Scenario includes those Developments with a status of Near CertainorMore than Likely. Table 3.3 presents the Uncertainty Logs for future
developments for the larger scale development locations.
Input/Land use Quantum Uncertainty Comments Include
Southwater
PlanningConsent granted
ConstructionStarted on site
High Quality Office space 27,300 m2 More than likely Yes
A3/A4 Bars and RestaurantsA1/A2 Retail Space
4,127 m2 Near Certain Yes
Community facility including a
library3,029 m2 Near Certain Yes
TIC events facilities 13,000 m2 Near Certain Yes
Three Hotels 450 beds More than likely Yes
Nine screen cinema 3,716 m2 Near Certain Yes
Residential units 330 More than likely Yes
Two Energy Centres - More than likely Yes
Multi-storey car park - Near Certain Yes
ASDA Southwater WayPlanning
Consent grantedSupermarket 60/40
Food/Non Food8,500
m
2 Near Certain Yes
Red Oak PlanningConsentGrantedA1 Retail space 11,675 m
2 More than likely Yes
Residential only
Britannia Way, Hadley 200 Near Certain
PlanningConsent granted
ConstructionStarted on site
Yes
Ketley Millennium Community 700 Near Certain Yes
Lawley Village 3,300 Near Certain Yes
Lightmoor Urban Village 800 Near Certain
Station Road, Donnington 250 Near Certain
Apley Castle, A442 200 More than likely Planning
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
19/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Input/Land use Quantum Uncertainty Comments Include
Frame Lane, Dosley 58 More than likely Consent granted
Furnace Road, Snedshill 60 More than likely
Marshbrook Way, Muxton 144 More than likely
Park Lane, Woodside 186 More than likely
Priorslee East 230 More than likely
Redhill Way 350 More than likely
Shifnal Road 129 More than likely
TAFS Development, Gower St 200 More than likely
Trench Lock Capewell 400 More than likely
Trench Lock Phase 1 100 More than likely
Lakeside Development
PlanningConsent granted
B1 66,500 m2 More than likely Yes
Hotel (beds) 225 More than likely Yes
Residential 550 More than likely Yes
Nom Dairy Muston PlanningConsent granted
ConstructionStarted on site
B1 2,970 m2 Near Certain Yes
B2 9,977 m2 Near Certain Yes
Queensway Business Park PlanningConsent granted
B2 5,800 m
2
Wickes Holyhead Road Planning
Consent grantedNon Food Retail 5,653 m2
Table 3.3: Core Scenario Uncertainty Log
3.6.3 It is assumed that all committed developments will be completed by the 2030
Design Year but only some of them will be occupied by 2015, the Scheme
Opening Year. Table 3.4details how much will be completed by opening year
Location Land Use Units Quantum OY Total
Central Park, HollingswoodRoad
B1 m2 10204 10204
Lakeside Development, CastleFarm Way nr Ricoh Site
B1 m2 66500 66500
Nom Dairy Muston, Granville Rdadj. Granville R'bout
B1 m2 2970 2970
Nom Dairy Muston, Granville Rdadj. Granville R'bout
B2 m2 9977 9977
Queensway Business ParkHadley Park
B2 m2 5120 5120
Queensway Business ParkHadley Park
B2 m2 680 680
Lakeside Development, Castle
Farm Way nr Ricoh Site Hotel beds 225 225
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
20/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Location Land Use Units Quantum OY Total
Wickes Holyhead Road, adj.Greyhound r'bout
NFR m2 5653 5653
B1/B3 Apley Castle, A442
Adj.Sparrowhawk Way Res Dwellings 200 200Britannia Way Hadley Res Dwellings 200 186
Frame Lane Doseley Res Dwellings 58 58
Furnace Road, adj. SnedshillTrading Estate
Res Dwellings 60 60
Ketley Millennium Community Res Dwellings 700 699
Lakeside Development, CastleFarm Way nr Ricoh Site
Res Dwellings 550 550
Lawley Village Res Dwellings 3300 1413
Lightmoor Urban Village Res Dwellings 800 800
Muxton C2/C3 (MarshbrookWay)
Res Dwellings 144 144
Park Lane Woodside Res Dwellings 186 186
Priorslee East (off GatecombeWay)
Res Dwellings 230 230
Redhill Way, op LodgewoodFarm
Res Dwellings 350 350
Shifnal Road, opp Halls ofResidence
Res Dwellings 129 129
Station Road Donnington Res Dwellings 250 250
TAFS Development, Gower Stadj. mini r'bout
Res Dwellings 200 200
Trench Lock Capewell,Sommerfield Road
Res Dwellings 400 400
Trench Lock Phase 1,Sommerfield Road
Res Dwellings 100 100
Red Oak (60% food/40% nonfood)
A1 m2 11,675 11.675
ASDA (off Southwater Way) A1 m2 8,178 8,178
Malinslee Link (south ofSouthwater Way)
Res Dwellings 80 80
Southwater
Office m2 27,300 1,300
A1/2/3/4 m 4,127 3,451
Library m2 3,029 3,029
TIC m 13,000 7,000
Hotel Beds 450 82
Cinema m2 3,716 3,716
Res Dwellings 330 0
EnergyCentres
2 1
MSCP Spaces 604 604
Table 3.4: Core Scenario Development
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
21/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Smaller Scale Committed Developments
3.6.4 T&WC provided details of smaller scale Committed Developments from theirplanning applications which have been approved. These developments are
therefore classed with a near certain probability and will be included in the core
scenario.
3.6.5 It is assumed that all these committed developments will be completed by the
2015 Opening Year. Development trip predictions were produced for the 891 key
land use sites that are committed within the study area.
3.6.6 The development trips were then added into the internal matrices. The locations of
these sites are as shown in Figure 3.2. The development matrices have beenderived based on:
! Land Use Trip Rates;
! Development Distributions.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
22/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
3.6.7 Vehicle trip generations and attractions at the development sites have been
adopted from TRICs 2011(b) and agreed with T&WC.
3.6.8 Trip rates for new developments have been supplied and agreed between T&WC
and the planners. These have been based on the TRICS database and are
outlined in Table 3.5on a per unitbasis, being per household for residential, and
per hectare gross floor area for employment.
3.6.9 It is recognised that trips generated from the new developments consist of cars,
LGVs, HGVs and PSVs. The split by journey purpose was assumed to be of
similar to TEMPRO forecast year
3.6.10 Distribution of development trips amongst origin and destination zones in the
model matrices has been determined using a Furnessprocedure. This technique
predicts how new trips from origin zones were likely to be distributed amongst
distribution zones. The process was structured to match the pattern and
distribution of origin destination movements contained in the validated matrices in
the 2009 base model.
3.6.11 A separate development-only trip matrix was created for each of the committed
development sites and for each time period, assessment year and growth
scenario. These were then combined and added to the internal and heavy vehicle
matrices.
3.6.12 The predicted trip patterns for developments with planning permission, at the
development sites to be included in the forecasts, are as shown in Appendix B
for employment and Appendix Cfor residential.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
23/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann
Figure 3.2: Location of Residential and Employment Committed developments
3.6.13 Land use option scenarios were defined for this study. From these, individual
residential and employment developments have been specified and this data has
been used to create an overall new development trip matrix for the 2015 and 2030
AM and PM peak hours. Each development has been modelled using a separate
zone, so that the impacts of any individual development can be identified in the
assignments. A summary of the Development trip rates is detailed in Table 3.5
and data used is shown in Appendix D.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
24/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 20
Table 3.5: Land Use Trip Rates
CAR PSV OGV CAR PSV OGV CAR PSV OGV CAR PSV OGV CAR PSV
2 A1 SHOPS 2.60 0.05 2.44 0.03 3.40 0.00 0.05 3.41 0.00 0.05 2.96
3 A2 FINANCIAL & PROF SERVICES 0.52 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.04
4 A3 FOOD & DRINK 0.00 0.00 1.95 1.67 2.87
5 B1a OFFICES 1.33 0.003 0.007 0.244 0.003 0.006 0.302 0.003 0.004 0.320 0.003 0.004 0.177 0.003
6 B1b R&D 0.66 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.097 B1c LIGHT INDUSTRY 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00
8 B2 GENERAL INDUSTRY 0.29 0.00 0.03 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.00
9 B3 - B7 SPECIAL INDUSTRIAL GROUPS 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.02 0.04
10 B8 STORGAGE AND DISTRIBUTION 0.60 0.00 0.02 1.28 0.00 0.31 0.51 0.00 0.05 0.55 0.00 0.05 1.15 0.00
11 C1 HOTELS AND HOSTELS 0.32 0.01 0.52 0.01 0.24 0.00 0.25 0.01 0.41
12 C2 RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTION 0.502 0.046 0.0025 0.2475 0.0155 0 0.0698 0.0088 0.0025 0.0781 0.0075 0.0023 0.103 0.013
13 D1 DENTAL SURGERY 7.14 1.43 5.05 5.14 1.43
13 D1 EXH CENTRE 0.37 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00
13 D1 LIBRARY 0.75 0.06 0.58 0.04 1.28 0.01 1.07 0.00 0.62
13 D1 MEDICAL CENTRE 5.63 0.00 2.58 0.00 4.04 0.01 4.20 0.01 2.31
13 D1 MUSEUMS 0.10 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.03 0.01 0.19 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01
13 D1 NURSERY 5.24 0.00 0.02 4.05 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.01 0.00 1.12 0.01 0.00 3.84 0.00
13 D1 PLACE OF WORSHIP 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.40
13 D1 TRAINING CENTRE 0.49 0.81 0.02 0.16 0.81 0.02 0.26 0.41 0.00 0.33 0.54 0.00 0.20 0.00
13 D1 VETS 2.80 1.33 2.42 2.42 3.47
14 D2 ASSEMBLY & LEISURE 0.73 0.88 1.50 1.64 2.24
16 C3 RESIDENTIAL 0.10 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.30
17 SG SUI-GENERIS 0.52 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.0419 A5 TAKEAWAY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.91 0.61 10.54 0.61 23.37
TYPECLASSUCOArrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Arrivals
AM IP
8 - 9 10 - 4
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
25/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 21
Plan NoDwellings/
Sqm
AMArrivalTotal
AMDeparture
Total
IPArrivalTotal
IPDeparture
Total
PMArrivalTotal
PMDeparture
Total
Residential 10,033 1,032 3,592 1,233 1,287 3,225 1,628
Employment 489,299 3,742 2,060 3,698 4,161 3,371 4,347
Total 4,774 5,652 4,931 5,448 6,596 5,976
Table 3.6: Summary of Development Trips
Development Distributions
3.6.14 The new developments have been broadly categorised into Residential and
Employment land uses. Different trip distribution matrices were built for each, as
they:
! Have different attractors and generators; and
! Have a different make-up of cars, LGV and Heavy Vehicles.
3.6.15 The development distributions are summarised in the following sections.
Cars and LGV
3.6.16 For new residential developments, cars and LGV trips leaving the sites weredistributed according to the nearest identical zone in term of Land use.
3.6.17 For employment developments, the distribution was derived based on destinations
from the employment zone.
Heavy Goods Vehicles
3.6.18 Development zones are also likely to generate and attract HGV trips as outlined
above. The distribution of these trips was estimated using the distributions of HGV
trips from the 2009 Base Year model.
Inter Development Trips
3.6.19 With such high levels of residential and employment sites proposed within T&WC,
the potential for trips to occur between new residential and employment
developments is high. To ensure that the model does not over-estimate trips,
potential linked movements between new residential and new employment zones
have been considered. This has been undertaken by considering the increase in
employment development trips relative to the total potential movements from all
residential areas within the study area. This proportional increase then provides a
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
26/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 22
guide for the level of movements 'to' new employment developments from the
new residential developments.
3.6.20 An example of this approach is outlined below:
! Total number of trip 'Origins' the study area in the AM peak (including the new
residential developments) = 40000;
! Number of trips with a 'Destination' at new employment areas in Telford =
800;
! Therefore the new employment sites represent around 12.5% of the trips
'Originating' from the study area; and
! Consequently it may be assumed that 12.5% of trips from the new residential
areas could go to the new employment sites.
3.6.21 These trips have been distributed between the new residential sites to the new
employment sites on a pro-rata basis, based upon the size of the employment site
in terms of trips. This approach differs from a traditional gravity model approach
which uses the relative size and distances between sites. This is because after
consideration of the study area, combined with the relative small size of Telford; it
is considered that distance would have a limited impact on destination choice.
Intra Development Trips
3.6.22 Intra development trips are trips that occur entirely within a mixed land use
development, and will not be observed as trips on the highway network.
3.6.23 In the Telford Model, the only significant site with large scale residential /
employment mixed use development is the Lakeside development. This site
contains 550 residential dwellings, 66,500 sqm of employment development and a
hotel. In this case, intra development trips have been assumed to be 30% of the
new residential trips within the Lakeside development and the demand matrices
have been adjusted to account for this. This methodology ensures that the
numbers of trips accessing and egressing the site are not overestimated.
3.7 Uncertainty
3.7.1 Current guidance requires that forecasts be based on most-likely (central) growth
estimates calculated from the TEMPRO and NTM based factors. These were
adjusted to include the most likely development related trips and are the core
forecasts in the assessment process. In addition to most-likely growth forecasts
guidance in WebTAG Unit 3.15.5 paragraph 1.4.13 requires the development of
two uncertainty forecasts. This guidance treats uncertainty by considering an
upper and lower range of variation around the central forecast provided by
TEMPRO and the NTM. This range varies travel demand around the central
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
27/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 23
forecasts by 2.5% for traffic forecasts one year ahead, rising with the square root
of the number of years to 15% for forecasts 36 years ahead.
3.7.2 The resulting range calculation for the design years from the base year 2009 areas follows:
! Opening Year (2015) range =6.12%.
! Design Year (2030) range = 11.46%.
3.7.3 These range values were applied to the most-likely travel demand matrices to
provide pessimistic (low-range) and optimistic (high-range) forecasts. The
identified developments incorporated in the most-likely forecasts are assumed to
go-ahead in both the pessimistic and optimistic forecasts, and are assumed to be
subject to the same range adjustments.
3.8 Combination of Matrices
3.8.1 The two components of matrix growth (as described in the previous sections)
were added and combined to produce the Pre-constrained Matrices for the 2015
and 2030 AM and PM Peak. These are:
! Background Growth; and
! Development Trips.
3.8.2 The combination process described above gives high demand forecasts for the
model. DfT guidance states that after the addition of developments to the
background growth matrices, the growth must be constrained to TEMPRO as
described in the next section.
3.9 Constraining to TEMPRO
3.9.1 To be compliant with DfT guidance, overall growth in the pre-constrained matrices
must be constrained to the TEMPRO 6.2 growth level. However, the development
growth proposed by T&WC in 2015 and 2030 as a whole exceeds the TEMPRO
household and job provisions for the Telford & Wrekin area. Each matrix by
journey purpose was constrained by TEMPRO sector separately so as to
accurately reflect growth within each TEMPRO sector, defined previously in
Figure 3.1. The overall total growth of each matrix is shown in Table 3.7 3.9.
AM Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 2464 2546 2812 1.0333 1.1412
HBE 8500 8805 9805 1.0359 1.1535
HBO 5659 6236 7781 1.1020 1.3750
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
28/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 24
HBW 17337 17991 19853 1.0377 1.1451
NHB 2597 2737 3016 1.0539 1.1613
Total 36557 38315 43267 1.0595 1.1598
Table 3.7: AM Peak TEMPRO constrained Growth 2015/2030
3.9.2 The AM peak TEMPRO constrained car development growth is around 6% higher
in 2015 and 16% higher in 2030 than 2009 Base Year traffic;
IP Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 2427 2506 2727 1.0326 1.1236HBE 1738 1787 1905 1.0282 1.0961
HBO 8966 9892 12319 1.1033 1.3740
HBW 3424 3538 3799 1.0333 1.1095
NHB 5712 6018 6633 1.0536 1.1612
Total 22267 23741 27383 1.0580 1.2242
Table 3.8: Inter Peak TEMPRO constrained Growth 2015/2030
3.9.3 The Inter-peak TEMPRO constrained car development growth is around 6%
higher in 2015 and 22% higher in 2030 than 2009 Inter Peak Base Year traffic;
PM Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 1520 1573 1745 1.0349 1.1480
HBE 886 916 1005 1.0339 1.1343
HBO 11744 12690 15262 1.0806 1.2996
HBW 10911 11314 12476 1.0369 1.1434
NHB 4686 4964 5517 1.0593 1.1773
Total 29747 31457 36005 1.0532 1.1823
Table 3.9: PM Peak TEMPRO constrained Growth 2015/2030
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
29/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 25
3.9.4 The TEMPRO constrained car development growth is around 5% higher in 2015
and 18% higher in 2030 than 2009 PM Base Year traffic;
Figure 3.3: AM Peak Comparison of Growth by Journey purpose 2015 & 2030
3.9.5 As it can be seen in Figure 3.3 the overall TEMPRO growth in Telford is only
slightly lower than unconstrained growth.
Figure 3.4: Inter Peak Comparison of Growth by Journey purpose 2015 & 2030
0
5000
1000015000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
EMP HBE HBO HBW NHB Total
AM Growth Comparison
Base Year
2015 AM
2030 AM
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
EMP HBE HBO HBW NHB Total
IP Growth Comparison
Base Year
2015 IP
2030 IP
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
30/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 26
3.9.6 As it can be seen in Figure 3.4 the overall TEMPRO growth in Telford is only
slightly lower than unconstrained growth in inter peak period.
Figure 3.5: PM Peak Comparison of Growth by Journey purpose 2030
3.9.7 As it can be seen in Figure 3.5 the overall TEMPRO growth in Telford is only
slightly lower than unconstrained growth in PM peak.
3.10 Public Transport Forecast
3.10.1 TEMPRO growth for bus and coach passengers has been used to project the
2015 and 2030 public transport matrices by TEMPRO sectors within Telford.
3.10.2 To be compliant with DfT guidance, overall growth in the pre-constrained matrices
must be constrained to the TEMPRO 6.2 growth level. TEMPRO Growth factors
applied to the validated 2009 Base Year public transport matrix are shown in
Appendix A by peak period, journey purpose and TEMPRO zone. The bus
passenger growth proposed by T&WC in 2030 as a whole is far lower than
TEMPRO as shown in Tables 3.10 to 3.15. Each matrix by journey purpose wasconstrained separately for car and non car available so as to accurately reflect
growth with each TEMPRO sector.
AM - CA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 16 16 17 1.0000 1.0625
HBE 148 151 171 1.0203 1.1554
HBO 189 196 232 1.0370 1.2275
HBW 151 150 154 0.9934 1.0199
NHB 16 17 18 1.0625 1.1250
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
EMP HBE HBO HBW NHB Total
PM Growth Comparison
Base Year
2015 PM
2030 PM
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
31/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 27
AM - CA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
Total 520 530 592 1.0226 1.1181
Table 3.10: 2015 & 2030 AM Peak Public Transport Growth for Car Available
AM - NCA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 134 135 143 1.0075 1.0672
HBE 488 495 560 1.0143 1.1475
HBO 880 918 1096 1.0432 1.2455
HBW 746 742 761 0.9946 1.0201
NHB 126 132 146 1.0476 1.1587
Total 2374 2422 2706 1.0214 1.1278
Table 3.11: 2015 & 2030 AM Peak Public Transport Growth for non Car Available
3.10.3 The 2030 public transport growth for car and non car available passengers is
around 14% higher than 2009 AM Base Year traffic;
IP - CA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 16 16 17 1.0000 1.0625
HBE 38 39 44 1.0263 1.1579
HBO 216 226 275 1.0463 1.2731
HBW 28 28 28 1.0000 1.0000NHB 107 112 124 1.0467 1.1589
Total 405 421 488 1.0239 1.1305Table 3.12: 2015 & 2030 Inter Peak Public Transport Growth for Car Available
IP - NCA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 94 96 99 1.0213 1.0532
HBE 229 236 263 1.0306 1.1485
HBO 976 1021 1239 1.0461 1.2695
HBW 156 156 157 1.0000 1.0064
NHB 539 564 624 1.0464 1.1577
Total 1994 2073 2382 1.0289 1.1271Table 3.13: 2015 & 2030 Inter Peak Public Transport Growth for non Car Available
3.10.4 The 2030 public transport growth for car and non car available passengers is
around 20% higher than 2009 Inter Base Year traffic;
PM - CA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 7 7 7 1.0000 1.0000
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
32/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 28
PM - CA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
HBE 78 81 89 1.0385 1.1410
HBO 91 94 111 1.0330 1.2198
HBW 72 72 72 1.0000 1.0000
NHB 46 48 53 1.0435 1.1522
Total 294 302 332 1.023 1.1026Table 3.14: 2015 & 2030 PM Peak Public Transport Growth for Car Available
IP - NCA Base Year 2015 20302015 TotalTEMPROGrowth
2030 TotalTEMPROGrowth
EMP 126 127 130 1.0079 1.0317
HBE 267 275 305 1.0300 1.1423HBO 559 583 685 1.0429 1.2254
HBW 327 327 328 1.0000 1.0031
NHB 234 245 271 1.0470 1.1581
Total 1513 1557 1719 1.0256 1.1121Table 3.15: 2015 & 2030 PM Peak Public Transport Growth for non Car Available
3.10.5 The 2030 public transport growth for car and non car available passengers is
around 14% higher than 2009 PM Base Year traffic;
3.10.6 Changes in bus fares were derived using historical fare data from the Bulletin of
Public Transport Statistics. Table 3.16 shows the changes in bus fare receipts
since 1990/91. On this basis, a linear bus fare growth factor of 1.014% p.a. in real
terms was calculated for the period 1995 to 2010, and this was assumed to apply
from 2010 onwards. The fare was therefore assumed to increase by 5.2% by 2015
and 22.4% by 2030 in comparison to the base.
*adjusted for inflation using the RPI.
March 1995=100
Year1 London
English
metropolitan
areas
English non-
metropolitan
areas England Scotland Wales Great Britain
1995 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.01996 101.8 102.7 102.0 102.1 100.4 98.9 101.8
1997 102.8 105.9 104.4 104.4 105.1 100.4 104.5
1998 103.3 107.6 106.0 105.7 109.9 103.8 106.3
1999 105.4 110.2 109.1 108.3 112.1 106.7 108.9
2000 102.5 112.0 111.3 109.1 111.8 110.9 109.6
2001 101.1 115.4 114.7 111.2 112.5 114.3 111.5
2002 97.0 119.3 118.6 112.9 112.6 118.1 113.1
2003 94.4 119.8 120.5 113.0 112.2 118.4 113.2
2004 97.7 122.4 123.3 115.9 110.5 120.6 115.5
2005 109.0 125.2 125.4 121.2 110.3 122.0 119.8
2006 112.5 133.9 132.0 127.5 112.7 124.2 125.6
2007 118.4 128.2 119.0 121.7 111.2 124.6 120.4
2008 108.8 129.5 120.8 120.4 111.0 126.0 119.4
2009 117.9 141.4 129.1 130.1 122.9 134.8 129.2
2010 127.1 136.5 125.2 130.4 120.3 131.8 129.1
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
33/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 29
Table 3.16: Local bus fares index (at 2009/10 prices*) by area type: Great Britain1995 to 2010
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
34/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 30
4. TRAFFIC FORECASTING RESULTS
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 This chapter summarises the results of the traffic forecasts for the opening year of
2015 and the scheme Design Year of 2030.
4.1.2 The full-growth future year reference casetrip matrices, were assigned on to the
DN and DS networks, to produce forecast traffic model outputs for 2015 and 2030,
model time periods (AM, IP and PM peak).
4.1.3 This section discusses the main aspects of the VISUM model runs. It summarises
the impact of full-growth trip volumes that is expected to arise in each forecast
situation.
4.1.4 The trip assignments were based on matrices with future year growth and
development trips constrained to TEMPRO growth. The matrices were assigned
for the DN and DS using the vehicle value of time and distance parameters shown
in Table 4.1and 4.2for 2015 and 2030.
2015 Weekday
MODEJourneyPurpose
AM Peak Inter Peak PM Peak
p per s
p per
m p per s
p per
m p per s
p per
mCar EMP 0.8104 0.0113 0.7928 0.0112 0.8104 0.0113
Car HBW 0.1747 0.0060 0.1733 0.0059 0.1747 0.0060
Car HBO 0.2217 0.0060 0.2305 0.0059 0.2217 0.0060
Car HBE 0.2217 0.0060 0.2305 0.0059 0.2217 0.0060
Car NHB 0.2217 0.0060 0.2305 0.0059 0.2217 0.0060LGV work/non-work
LGV0.3126 0.0065 0.3126 0.0065 0.3126 0.0065
OGV1/OGV2 HGV 0.2707 0.0203 0.2707 0.0200 0.2707 0.0203Table 4.1: Vehicle Values of Time and Distance 2030
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
35/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 31
2030 Weekday
MODEJourneyPurpose
AM Peak Inter Peak PM Peak
p per sp per
mp per s
p per
mp per s
p per
mCar EMP 1.0332 0.0099 1.0134 0.0098 0.9956 0.0100
Car HBW 0.2110 0.0042 0.2096 0.0042 0.2073 0.0042
Car HBO 0.2610 0.0042 0.2710 0.0042 0.2806 0.0042
Car HBE 0.2610 0.0042 0.2710 0.0042 0.2806 0.0042
Car NHB 0.2610 0.0042 0.2710 0.0042 0.2806 0.0042
LGV work/non-work
LGV 0.4005 0.0071 0.4005 0.0071 0.4005 0.0071
OGV1/OGV2 HGV 0.3483 0.0222 0.3483 0.0219 0.3483 0.0226
Table 4.2: Vehicle Values of Time and Distance 2030
4.1.5 The growth in traffic in the model area has increased the number of trips in the
network by around 5%, 7% and 6% respectively in the 2015 AM, Inter peak and
PM peak respectively. This has had an effect on traffic flows & delays in the
network when compared to the base year. Tables 4.3 4.5below illustrates the
difference in trips between the base year 2009 and 2015. The highest growth will
be in the Inter peak (7%).
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2015Growth from
BaseGrowth from
Base %
Employers Business 2464 2543 79 3.2%Home Based Education 8500 8718 218 2.6%
Home Based Others 5659 6210 551 9.7%
Home Based Work 17337 17938 601 3.5%
Non Home Based 2597 2722 125 4.8%
Light Good Vehicles 1937 2209 272 14.0%
Heavy Good Vehicles 958 993 35 3.7%
Total 39452 41333 1881 4.8%Table 4.3: AM Comparison of 2009 and 2030 Matrices by Journey Purpose
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2015Growth from
BaseGrowth from
Base %
Employers Business 2427 2503 76 3.1%
Home Based Education 1738 1773 35 2.0%
Home Based Others 8966 9845 879 9.8%
Home Based Work 3424 3529 105 3.1%
Non Home Based 5712 5993 281 4.9%
Light Good Vehicles 1571 1793 222 14.1%
Heavy Good Vehicles 758 783 25 3.3%
Total 24596 26219 1623 6.6%Table 4.4: IP Comparison of 2009 and 2015 Matrices by Journey Purpose
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
36/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 32
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2015Growth from
BaseGrowth from
Base %
Employers Business 1520 1576 56 3.7%
Home Based Education 886 904 18 2.1%
Home Based Others 11744 12610 866 7.4%
Home Based Work 10911 11278 367 3.4%
Non Home Based 4686 5195 509 10.9%
Light Good Vehicles 1252 1430 178 14.2%
Heavy Good Vehicles 668 693 25 3.7%
Total 31667 33685 2018 6.4%Table 4.5: PM Comparison of 2009 and 2015 Matrices by Journey Purpose
4.1.6 The growth in traffic in the model area has increased the number of trips in thenetwork by around 20%, 25% and 22% respectively in the 2030 AM, Inter peak
and PM peak respectively. This has had an effect on traffic flows & delays in the
network when compared to the base year. Tables 4.6 4.8below illustrate the
difference in trips between the base year 2009 and 2015. The highest growth will
be in the Inter peak (25%).
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2030Growth from
BaseGrowth from
Base %
Employers Business 2464 2812 348 14.1%
Home Based Education 8500 9805 1305 15.4%
Home Based Others 5659 7781 2122 37.5%
Home Based Work 17337 19852 2515 14.5%
Non Home Based 2597 3016 419 16.1%
Light Good Vehicles 1937 3094 1157 59.7%
Heavy Good Vehicles 958 1100 142 14.8%
Total 39452 47460 8008 20.3%Table 4.6: AM Comparison of 2009 and 2030 Matrices by Journey Purpose
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2030Growth from
Base
Growth from
Base %Employers Business 2427 2727 300 12.4%
Home Based Education 1738 1905 167 9.6%
Home Based Others 8966 12319 3353 37.4%
Home Based Work 3424 3799 375 11.0%
Non Home Based 5712 6633 921 16.1%
Light Good Vehicles 1571 2509 938 59.7%
Heavy Good Vehicles 758 867 109 14.4%
Total 24596 30759 6163 25.1%Table 4.7: IP Comparison of 2009 and 2030 Matrices by Journey Purpose
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
37/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 33
Journey Purpose 2009 Base 2030Growth from
BaseGrowth from
Base %
Employers Business 1520 1745 225 14.8%
Home Based Education 886 1005 119 13.4%
Home Based Others 11744 15262 3518 30.0%
Home Based Work 10911 12476 1565 14.3%
Non Home Based 4686 5517 831 17.7%
Light Good Vehicles 1252 2000 748 59.7%
Heavy Good Vehicles 668 768 100 15.0%Total 31667 38773 7106 22.4%
Table 4.8: PM Comparison of 2009 and 2030 Matrices by Journey Purpose
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
38/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 34
4.2 Variable Demand Modelling
4.2.1 The WebTAG Guidance on Variable Demand Modelling (Units 3.10.1 to 3.10.5)
recommends that the assessments of Government funded investments intransport schemes needs to consider the effects of variable demand. The
guidance provides methods for assessing a schemes impact on travel demand on
consequential economic benefit.
4.2.2 The Telford Model has been formulated to represent travel demand relating to
highway movements. In the base year model development realism testing was
undertaken to establish parameters for use in variable demand modelling to
representing the distribution response.
4.2.3 Variable demand modelling has been undertaken using VISUMAddIn
nested
demand model which provides a direct link with the VISUM assignment software.
4.2.4 The trip distribution demand response only applies to trips with the differing
responses dependant on trip purpose. The car trips relating to work (employers
business) are least responsive, with commuting trips being more responsive and
other trips being the most responsive. The AddIn is based on incremental
changes from the pivot reference for each origin-destination pair, in the Do
Nothing assignments the pivot costs are the base year, while for the do something
assignments the pivot costs are the Do Nothing. The demand model loop
excludes LGV and OGV based trips which are considered to be fixed demands.
4.2.5 The average car occupancy were obtained from the RSI interviews.
4.2.6 Do Nothing highway networks, vehicle matrices, and pivot reference assignments
were input into VISUM demand model. The demand model then skims the
reference assignment costs and then uses the variable demand parameters to
create new VDN trip matrices. These matrices are then reassigned within
VISUM to recalculate new highway costs. This continues until specified
convergence criteria are met.
4.2.7 The demand response distribution lambda parameters for each journey purpose
used in the model are given in variable demand model report
4.3 Forecast Convergence
4.3.1 The model can be said to be properly assigned if it has converged through an
iterative methods of reaching equilibrium. The importance of achieving
convergence is related to the need to provide stable, consistent and robust model
results. On addition model convergence is the key to robust economic appraisal.
In VISUM, convergence is considered to be achieved if all matrix values of the link
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
39/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 35
attribute in the network differ from their preceding values by less than a given
threshold value. Two convergence criteria which are used are:
! Duality gap (absolute deviation) which expresses the convergence qualityas the volume-weighted difference between current total impedance
calculated on the network and the hypothetic vehicle impedance if all
vehicles would use nothing impedance routes (i.e. the best route). The
absolute value between maximum and nothing impedance should be less
than 5 seconds; and
! The relative gap (relative deviation) which determines the difference
between the current volume in the network and the equilibrium. It
measures the excess cost of vehicles that do not yet take the optimum
routes in proportion to the total impedance in the network. This valueshould be less than 0.1%.
4.3.2 The assignments undertaken for the base year model have been assessed in this
manner in order to ensure that the appropriate convergence has been achieved.
The results of these assignments are shown in Table 4.1.
Criteria AM Peak Inter Peak PM Peak
Convergence after loop No. 15 9 17
Duality Gap (sec) 0.0015 0.0005 0.0027
Relative Gap (%) 0.0016 0.0005 0.0029
% Link Flows differing by < 5% 97.8 98.6 97.8Table 4.1: Highway Model convergence Results
4.3.3 The convergence criteria are set by the Department for Transport in Variable
Demand Modelling Convergence Realism and Sensitivity, Tag Unit 3.10.4 (April
2011). It states that a supply / demand %GAP value of less than 0.2% is an
acceptable level of convergence between supply and demand, with a desire level
less than 0.1%.
4.3.4 A summary of the convergence gap values is shown in Table 4.2 for the core
scenario forecast results for each of the model runs.
Criteria 2015 2030
Convergence after loops 16 22
% Gap 0.012% 0.016%Table 4.2: Demand Model convergence Results
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
40/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 36
4.4 Demand Response for Car
4.4.1 It is often easier to visualise the trip matrix in a sector form. For the Telford
Transport Model the following sectoring system was used (shown in Figure 4.1):
Figure 4.1 - Sector System in Telford
4.4.2 The model output for each time period have also been analysed and summarised
for Do Nothing and DS variable demand by Telford Super Output Area (SOA).
SOA 2015 AM DN 2015 AM DS Diff Diff%
1 South 508 508 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 3713 3695 19 0.5%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 820 804 16 2.0%
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
41/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 37
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 1626 1611 16 1.0%
5 North Telford 1375 1363 11 0.8%
6 North-East Telford 5785 5749 36 0.6%
7 North-West Telford 5174 5035 139 2.7%
8 South-East Telford 1982 1902 80 4.0%
9 Stafford Park 1461 1453 8 0.6%
10 Town Centre 4380 4667 -287 -6.5%
11 West 2202 2202 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 23 28 -5 -20.7%
13 Lawley 313 308 6 1.8%
14 South-West Telford 3467 3506 -39 -1.1%
15 North 2544 2544 0 0.0%
16 South 2947 2947 0 0.0%38322 38322 0 0
Table 4.3: AM Comparison of 2015 Cars trips
4.4.3 As it can be seen from the Table 4.3 the 2015 Do Something AM peak will lead to
an increase of 6.5 % increase Town Centre in car journeys.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
42/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 38
SOA 2015 IP DN 2015 IP DS Diff Diff%
1 South 693 693 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 2028 1959 69 3.4%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 325 315 9 2.9%
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 496 470 27 5.4%
5 North Telford 839 850 -11 -1.3%
6 North-East Telford 3601 3491 110 3.0%
7 North-West Telford 4052 3905 147 3.6%
8 South-East Telford 1484 1522 -38 -2.6%
9 Stafford Park 198 200 -3 -1.3%
10 Town Centre 1764 2222 -458 -26.0%
11 West 1888 1888 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 52 51 2 3.2%
13 Lawley 144 140 5 3.2%
14 South-West Telford 2588 2446 142 5.5%
15 North 1552 1552 0 0.0%
16 South 2049 2049 0 0.0%
23752 23752 0 0Table 4.4: Inter Peak Comparison of 2015 Cars trips
4.4.4 As it can be seen from the Table 4.4the 2015 Do Something Inter peak will lead
to an increase of 26 % in Town Centre increase in car journeys
SOA 2015 PM DN 2015 PM DS Diff Diff%
1 South 1087 1087 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 2832 2817 14 0.5%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 356 370 -14 -4.0%
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 1072 1083 -11 -1.0%
5 North Telford 964 990 -26 -2.7%
6 North-East Telford 4795 4697 99 2.1%
7 North-West Telford 2875 2783 92 3.2%
8 South-East Telford 2252 2350 -98 -4.4%9 Stafford Park 92 88 4 4.0%
10 Town Centre 1020 1112 -92 -9.0%
11 West 3375 3375 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 175 173 3 1.6%
13 Lawley 781 804 -24 -3.0%
14 South-West Telford 3702 3648 53 1.4%
15 North 3647 3647 0 0.0%
16 South 2448 2448 0 0.0%
31473 31473 0 0
Table 4.5: PM Comparison of 2015 Cars trips
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
43/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 39
4.4.5 As it can be seen from the Table 4.5the 2015 Do Something PM peak will lead to
an increase of 9 % in Town Centre increase in car journeys.
SOA 2030 AM DN 2030 AM DS Diff Diff%
1 South 571 571 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 4313 4231 82 1.9%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 946 932 14 1.5%
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 1879 1869 10 0.5%
5 North Telford 1476 1456 20 1.3%
6 North-East Telford 6481 6473 8 0.1%
7 North-West Telford 6079 5904 175 2.9%
8 South-East Telford 2315 2255 60 2.6%
9 Stafford Park 1597 1587 10 0.6%
10 Town Centre 4715 5057 -342 -7.3%
11 West 2482 2482 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 26 32 -5 -20.4%
13 Lawley 391 380 10 2.6%
14 South-West Telford 3846 3888 -41 -1.1%
15 North 2859 2859 0 0.0%
16 South 3294 3294 0 0.0%
43268 43268 0 0Table 4.6: AM Comparison of 2030 Cars trips
4.4.6 From the Table 4.6the 2030 Do Something AM peak it can be seen that there is
an increase of 7.3 % increase Town Centre in car journeys.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
44/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 40
SOA 2030 IP DN 2030 IP DS Diff Diff%
1 South 807 807 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 2369 2254 114 4.8%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 369 347 22 6.0%
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 612 574 39 6.3%
5 North Telford 893 881 12 1.4%
6 North-East Telford 4312 4242 71 1.6%
7 North-West Telford 4735 4544 191 4.0%
8 South-East Telford 1642 1642 1 0.0%
9 Stafford Park 219 222 -3 -1.3%
10 Town Centre 1915 2466 -552 -28.8%
11 West 2188 2188 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 59 60 -1 -0.9%
13 Lawley 171 172 -1 -0.3%
14 South-West Telford 2942 2837 106 3.6%
15 North 1807 1807 0 0.0%
16 South 2344 2344 0 0.0%
27386 27386 0 0Table 4.7: Inter Peak Comparison of 15 Cars trips
4.4.7 As it can be seen from the Table 4.7the 2030 Do Something Inter peak will lead
to an increase of 29 % in Town Centre increase in car journeys.
SOA 2030 PM DN 2030 PM DS Diff Diff%
1 South 1237 1237 0 0.0%
2 Hadley/Ketley 3284 3196 88 2.7%
3 Halesfield/Sutton Hill 416 415 1 0.3%
4 Iron Bridge/Madeley 1213 1241 -28 -2.3%
5 North Telford 1090 1081 9 0.8%
6 North-East Telford 5454 5449 5 0.1%
7 North-West Telford 3246 3134 112 3.4%
8 South-East Telford 2778 2819 -41 -1.5%9 Stafford Park 109 95 14 13.2%
10 Town Centre 1106 1250 -144 -13.0%
11 West 3858 3858 0 0.0%
12 Newdale/Lightmoor 203 204 -2 -0.8%
13 Lawley 869 901 -32 -3.7%
14 South-West Telford 4211 4194 17 0.4%
15 North 4169 4169 0 0.0%
16 South 2767 2767 0 0.0%
36009 36009 0 0
Table 4.8: PM Comparison of 2015 Cars trips
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
45/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 41
4.4.8 As it can be seen from the Table 4.8the 2015 Do Something PM peak will lead to
an increase of 13 % in Town Centre increase in car journeys.
Journey Purpose 2015DN 2015DS Diff Diff %
Employers Business (EMP) 161 165 4 2.4%
Home Based Education (HBE) 732 742 10 1.4%
Home Based Others (HBO) 1329 1382 54 4.0%
Home Based Work (HBW) 916 945 29 3.1%
Non Home Based (NHB) 165 170 6 3.4%
Total 3302 3404 102 3.1%
Table 4.9: AM Comparison of 2015 Public Transport Passengers
4.4.9 From the Table 4.9 the variable demand will lead an increase of passengers by
3.1%. The highest increase will be for the HBO journeys.
Journey Purpose 2030 DN 2030 DS Diff Diff %
Employers Business 116 118 2 1.7%
Home Based Education 307 314 7 2.3%
Home Based Others 1514 1583 70 4.6%
Home Based Work 185 192 7 3.9%
Non Home Based 749 770 21 2.8%
Total 2870 2978 107 3.7%
Table 4.10: IP Comparison of 2015 Public Transport Passengers
4.4.10 From Table 4.10, it can be seen that the variable demand will lead an increase of
passengers by 3.7%. The highest increase will be for HBO (4.6%) and the lowest
increase will be for Employers Business (1.7%).
Journey Purpose 2030 Fixed2030
VariableDiff Diff %
Employers Business 137 138 1 0.5%
Home Based Education 394 427 33 8.3%
Home Based Others 795 821 25 3.2%Home Based Work 399 425 26 6.4%
Non Home Based 324 342 18 5.5%
Total 2051 2153 102 5.0%
Table 4.11: PM Comparison of 2030 Public Transport Passengers
4.4.11 Table 4.11shows that the variable demand will lead an increase of passengers by
5.0%. The highest increase will be for HBE (8.3%) and the lowest increase will be
for Employers Business (0.5%).
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
46/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 42
5. HIGHWAY NETWORK PERFORMANCE
5.1 Network Performance
5.1.1 The network performance for Telford is summarised in term of the following:
! Total distance travelled (vehicle kilometres) the total distance travelled on the
modelled highway network multiplied by the number of vehicles
! Total travel time (vehicle hours) the total time travelled on the modelled
network including delays multiplied by the number of vehicles
! Total delay (vehicle hours) total delay is taken as the difference between
congested and free flow travel time on the modelled highway network in hours
multiplied by the number of vehicles.
5.1.2 As it can be seen in Table 5.1, the vehicle hour in 2015 reduces in all peak
periods with the highest in PM peak (0.27%). The vehicle kilometre slightly
increases with the highest in PM peak (0.19%).
Period Attributes 2015 DN 2015 DS Diff Diff %
2015 AM Peak
Vehicle 38322 38322 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 7606 7588 18 0.24%
Vehicle km 426175 426396 -221 -0.05%
2015 Inter Peak
vehicle 23752 23752 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 4649 4643 6 0.13%
Vehicle km 265449 265903 -454 -0.17%
2015 PM Peak
Vehicle 31473 31473 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 7058 7039 19 0.27%
Vehicle km 388380 389129 -749 -0.19%
Table 5.1: Comparison of 2015 DN and DS Network Performance
5.1.3 As it can be seen in Table 5.2,the vehicle hour in 2030 reduces only in PM peak
periods (0.30%). Slight increase is noticed Inter Peak (0.09%) and AM peak
(0.16%).The vehicle kilometre slightly increases with the highest in AM peak
(0.32%).
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
47/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 43
Period Attributes 2030DN 2030 DS Diff Diff %
2030 AM Peak
Vehicle 43268 43268 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 8782 8796 -14 -0.16%
Vehicle km 482399 483930 -1531 -0.32%
2030 Inter Peak
vehicle 27386 27386 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 5461 5466 -5 -0.09%
Vehicle km 308271 309060 -789 -0.26%
2030PM Peak
Vehicle 36009 36009 0 0.00%
Vehicle hr 8281 8256 25 0.30%
Vehicle km 443398 443623 -225 -0.05%
Table 5.2: Comparison of 2030 DN and DS Network Performance
5.1.4 The 2030 Do nothing traffic is shown in Figures 5.1 5.3and 2030 Do something
is shown in Figures 5.4 5.6. It can be seen that the M54 and A442 will carry the
highest amount of traffic. There is no significant change in traffic in box but slight
increase is noticed to the links leading to the Town Centre. There is also
increased level of traffic in the location of committed development within the urban
area of Telford.
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
48/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 44
Figure 5.1 2030 Traffic Flow in Telford DN AM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
49/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 45
Figure 5.2 2030 Traffic Flow in Telford DN Inter Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
50/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 46
Figure 5.3 2030 Traffic Flow in Telford DN PM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
51/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 47
Figure 5.4 2030 Traffic Flow in Telford DS AM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
52/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 48
Figure 5.5 2030 Traffic Flow in TelfordDS Inter Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
53/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 49
Figure 5.6 2030 Traffic Flow in Telford DS PM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
54/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 50
5.1.5 There are no considerable delays at the key junctions in Telford in 2015. However
in 2030 AM peak the junctions with slight delays are:
! B4373/ Wombridge Road Junction
! St Quentin Signalised Junction
! Hollinswood Junction
5.1.6 No significant delays will be experienced in the Inter peak except for the following
junction:
! ASDA Junction
! Hollinswood Junction
5.1.7 In the PM peak the junctions with average delays are shown in Figure 5.9 and
are:
! St Quentin Signalised Junction
! ASDA Junction
! Hollinswood Junction
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
55/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 51
Figure 5.7: 2030 Junction Delay in TelfordDS AM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
56/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 52
Figure 5.8 2030 Junction Delay in Telford DS Inter Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
57/89
TELFORD FUTURE LOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 53
Figure 5.9: 2030 Junction Delay in Telford DS PM Peak
-
8/12/2019 Appendix B3 - Forecasting Report
58/89
TELFORD FUTURELOCAL ACTION FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTHFORECASTING REPORTQ30061/VAA/FR/REV C
Pell Frischmann Page 54
6. PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK PERFORMANCE
6.1.1 The overall 2030 boarding and alighting is shown in Table 6.1and public transport
network performance for the whole modelled area is summarised in Figure 6.1
6.3. As it can be seen the number of passenger is significantly high especially to
town centre. This is as a result of high predicted growth by TEMPRO forecast.
Other areas which will have high number of passengers include:
! Wellington Bus Station
! Muxton
! Donnington Aldi
! Sutton hill
! Oakengates Bus Station
! Brookside Avenue! Woodside
! Madeley Centre
! Dawley Bus Station
! Telford Rail Station
6.1.2 The significant growth is attributed to the predicted growth high growth
2030 AM Peak 2030 Inter Peak 2030 PM Peak
PassBoard
PassAlight
PassBoard
PassAlight
PassBoard
PassAlight
Woodside (Any stop on loop) 131 57 108 70 48 79
Wombridge Road 16 9 10 15 6 17
Willowfield 79 75 62 129 22 87
Wellsfield 52 24 35 61 15 41
Wellington Bus Station 105 456 231 294 162 108
University 6 9 6 6 20 0
Unicorn 6 0 1 0 1 1
Trench Lock / Summerfield Road 22 15 22 20 21 22
Trench (Shawbirch) 16 4 8 29 4 11
The Grove 14 12 4 6 8 7Telford Rail Station 59 144 28 34 59 27
Telford Bus Station 456 2077 1185