Appendix e Strategic and Town Centre Transport Modelling

8/10/2019 Appendix e Strategic and Town Centre Transport Modelling

1/71

Appendix E

Strategic and Town CentreTransport Modelling (VISSIMModel and SEDMMTS)

Part of the Transport Study 2011

Prepared for the Bournemouth Town CentreArea Action Plan


2/71

Bournemouth Town Centre

AAP Appraisal

VISSIM Assessment Final Report

05 August 2011

Export House

Cawsey Way

Woking

Surrey

GU21 6QX

UK

T +44 (0)1483 731000

F +44 (0)1483 731003


3/71

Bournemouth Town Centre AAP Appraisal

August 2011

S:\Projects\1035372 Bournemouth VISSIM 2011\09 Documents\09 Final Report\Aug 05 11 - AAP VISSIM

Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

i

Document Control Sheet

Project Title Bournemouth Town Centre AAP Appraisal

Report Title VISSIM Assessment Final Report

Revision D

Status Final

Control Date 05/08/11

Record of Issue

Issue Status Author Date Check Date Author ised Date

A Draft D Westbury 26/5/11 R Surl 26/5/11 R Surl 26/5/11

B Draft D Westbury 24/6/11 I Baker 27/6/11 R Surl 29/6/11

C Draft D Westbury 05/7/11 R Surl 06/7/11 R Surl 06/7/11

D Final D Westbury 05/8/11 R Surl 05/8/11 R Surl 05/8/11

Distribution

Organisation Contact Copies

Bournemouth Borough Council Geoff Turnbull electronic

Bournemouth Borough Council Mike Campkin electronic

Bournemouth Borough Council Alexis Edwards electronic

Bournemouth Borough Council Planning & Transport 3


4/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

ii

Contents

Document Control Sheet............................................................................................... i

Contents ........................................................................................................................ ii

Tables ........................................................................................................................... iv

1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Purpose of this study............................................................................................. 1

1.3 Scope of the study................................................................................................. 2

2 ST1 Removal of all background t raffic growth .............................................. 4

2.1

Previous assessment of background growth......................................................... 4

2.2 Background traffic growth datasets....................................................................... 4

2.3 Revised AAP assumptions.................................................................................... 4

3 ST2 Removal of internal background traff ic growth only............................. 5

3.1 Previous assessment of background traffic growth............................................... 5

4 ST3 Trip Generation Review............................................................................ 6

4.1 Background traffic growth...................................................................................... 6

4.2 Changes to the AAP Strategy ............................................................................... 6

4.3

Changes to the Parking Strategy .......................................................................... 7

4.4 Hotel Developments - Trip Generation Review..................................................... 7

4.5 Residential Developments - Trip Generation Review............................................ 9

4.6 Leisure and Cultural Developments - Trip Generation Review ........................... 10

4.7 Employment Developments - Trip Generation Review ....................................... 12

4.8 Retail Developments - Trip Generation Review .................................................. 13

4.9 Adjustment for access to Public Transport.......................................................... 14

4.10 Revised Trip Generation Figures ........................................................................ 14

5

Modelling resul ts from sensi tiv ity tests .......................................................... 16

5.1 Sensitivity Test 1 (ST1) ....................................................................................... 16

5.2 Sensitivity Test 2 (ST2) ....................................................................................... 16

5.3 Sensitivity Test 3 ................................................................................................. 17

5.4 Summary of findings............................................................................................ 17

6 Further modell ing .............................................................................................. 18

6.1 Trip Generation ................................................................................................... 18

6.2 Background Traffic Growth.................................................................................. 18

6.3

AM peak .............................................................................................................. 19


5/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

iii

6.4 PM peak .............................................................................................................. 19

6.5 Saturday peak ..................................................................................................... 20

6.6

Saturday evening peak........................................................................................ 21

7 Possible mitigation measures to be considered: developing the DoSomething network ........................................................................................... 22

7.1 The need for mitigation measures....................................................................... 22

7.2 Mitigation measures identified by examining the 2021 PM peak ........................ 22

7.3 Mitigation measures identified by examining the Saturday peak periods............ 23

8 Summary and conclusions ............................................................................... 25

8.1 Sensitivity tests 1 and 2....................................................................................... 25

8.2

Sensitivity Test 3 ................................................................................................. 25

8.3 AM peak .............................................................................................................. 25

8.4 PM peak .............................................................................................................. 25

8.5 Saturday peak ..................................................................................................... 26

8.6 Saturday evening peak........................................................................................ 26

8.7 Summary of mitigation and further recommendations......................................... 26

Appendicies

A AAP Sites and Trip Rate Methodology

B AAP Trip Generation

C AAP Land Use Class Trip Rates

D Background Traffic Growth

E VISSIM Modelling Network Statistics


6/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

iv

Tables

Table 1: Alterations to the AAP development sites........................................................... 7

Table 2: Alterations to the Parking Strategy ..................................................................... 7

Table 3: Hotel use PM peak trip rates .............................................................................. 8

Table 4: Residential use PM peak trip rates..................................................................... 9

Table 5: Winter Gardens leisure use PM peak trip rates derived from TRICS ............... 11

Table 6: Swimming Pool use PM peak trip rates............................................................ 11

Table 7: Employment use PM peak trip rates................................................................. 12

Table 8: Summary of reductions to vehicle trip generation for AAP land uses............... 15

Table 9: Summary of AAP site development trip generation in the PM peak ................. 15

Table 10: Comparison of total vehicles flows in 2016 PM peak DMO and ST1 models. 16



Table 13: Summary of development trip generation by assessment year and peak hour................................................................................................................................ 18


7/71


8/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

2

It was agreed with the Council that these assumptions represented an extremely

cautious, worst case scenario and in combination - may not be realistic. At the

same time, the development aspirations in the AAP were recognised as very

ambitious, implying an exceptionally high rate of growth in the town centre. In purely

modelling terms, a conventional approach would have been to constrain this impliedgrowth to a more conservative total, in line with TEMPRO forecasts. However, as the

specific purpose of this model is to examine the full implications of the AAP, it is

important that it reflects all the development that is envisaged for the town centre in

the AAP.

It was therefore agreed that the assumptions used in trip generation for the DM0

models should be re-visited. The issues considered were:

Possible double counting of growth through the cumulative assessment

of forecast background traffic growth and estimated development

growth;

Cumulative assessment of all AAP sites;

Possible interactions between trip generators at AAP sites;

Possible interactions between AAP sites and existing trip generators;

Assumed trip rates for the AAP sites; and

Further clarification of likely development uses at the AAP sites.

The aim of this exercise was to develop a revised model which would be both

realistic and fit for its specific purpose of examining the likely effects of the AAP

proposals in the town centre.

1.3 Scope of the study

1.3.1 Sensitivity Tests

To ascertain the impact of the issues with the DM0 models, it was agreed that three

sensitivity tests should be undertaken, representing different ways to create a more

conservative assessment of development growth:

ST1. The removal of background traffic growth for the whole network;

ST2. The removal of background traffic growth related to internal zones

only;

ST3. The re-assessment of trip generation for land use classes on a site by

site basis. This test also provided an opportunity to take account of

changes in the Councils assumptions about some development sites.

These initial sensitivity tests were conducted for the PM peak hour only (17:00 to

18:00) as this is the most critical time period for the network. It was agreed to model

the 2016 assessment year only in the first instance.


9/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

3

1.3.2 Modelled Network

The sensitivity tests were conducted using the Do Minimumhighway network, as

used in previous tests. This network includes the following consented schemes2

which had already been proposed to mitigate the effect of the proposed

developments:

Bath Road development car park access the existing priority

accesses to the Bath Road North and Bath Road South car parks is

replaced with a four arm signalised junction which includes a dedicated

all-round pedestrian stage;

Bath Road/ Westover/Road/ Hinton Road the existing roundabout

which included access to Westover Road and egress from Hinton Road

is removed with both roads having junctions with Bath Road, separated

by about 40m;

Bath Road/ Upper Hinton Road/ Russell Cotes Road the junction

which currently forms a priority crossroads is fully signalised with a

dedicated all-round pedestrian stage;

Exeter Road/ Cranbourne Road/ Exeter Crescent the existing

staggered crossroads is replaced by a signalised junction; and

BIC Roundabout the four-arm priority controlled roundabout is

replaced by a signalised crossroads including a dedicated all-round

pedestrian stage.

A number of schemes on Tregonwell Road which were implemented

after the base model was built.

The three sensitivity tests are described in more detail in sections 2, 3 and 4 below.

The results of these initial sensitivity tests are set out in Chapter 5.

2Previously consented schemes may not come forward in the form assumed in the planning

applications however mitigation at these locations will be required to deliver the AAP

aspirations.


10/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

4

2 ST1 Removal of all background traffic growth

2.1 Previous assessment of background growth

It was agreed that the DM0 models were a robust worst case scenario for assessing

the future operation of the network. They assumed there would be background traffic

growth (as predicted by TEMPRO utilising National Trip End Model (NTEM) version

5.4) on top of which development growth from the AAP sites is treated as additional

traffic. This method was agreed as no information was available on which new

developments were included within the TEMPRO dataset.

Using this approach, background traffic growth in the PM peak period between 2008

and 2016 added 1,166 additional trips to the modelled network. Approximately half of

these trips were associated with growth in internal (town centre) zones.

Within the same peak, the level of vehicle growth identified with the developmentsites of the AAP was 1,684 trips.

It can be seen that development trips from the AAP sites vastly outweighed trips

associated with background traffic growth. For this sensitivity test (ST1) is assumed

that the level of development envisaged in the Town Centre AAP is so large that it

must in fact include and subsume all the background traffic growth. Therefore, the

first sensitivity test (ST1) examines the effect of removing all background traffic

growth from the origin and destination matrix.

2.2 Background traffic growth datasets

Since the DM0 modelling, a new version of the NTEM datasets (TEMPRO) has beenreleased by the DfT. These datasets are the first to reflect how the continued

recession has impacted the project changes in trip making. Although these new

datasets have not been officially accepted (expected July 2011) they are useful for

comparison with the previous versions.

The new datasets clearly show how forecasts for future trip making in both

Bournemouth and Dorset have significantly reduced since the 2008 datasets were

released. In the PM peak, the equivalent level of vehicle growth between 2008 and

2016 would be 350 compared with the previous forecast of 1,166.

As ST1 assumes no background traffic growth, the change in TEMPRO is not an

issue for this test, but the fact that lower growth is forecast in Version 6.2 arguably

makes the test more realistic.

2.3 Revised AAP assumptions

It was highlighted by Bournemouth Borough Council that two of the AAP sites, NCP

Exeter Road and The Former Winterbourne Hotel, previously anticipated for

development by 2026, should now be brought forward into the assessment for 2021.

Trip generation figures for these sites were subsequently added to the matrix.

Although background traffic has been removed, this scenario is still considered to bea worst-case in terms of generated traffic associated with the AAP sites.


11/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

5

3 ST2 Removal of internal background trafficgrowth only

3.1 Previous assessment of background traffic growthDuring the DM0modelling the prediction of background traffic growth assumed

different growth rates for traffic which interacted with the modelled internal zones (i.e.

had an origin or destination within the town centre) than for trips purely between

external zones (through traffic).

Whereas ST1 removed all background traffic growth in the area, the second test

(ST2)simply assumes that the level of development within the internal zones will

have no bearing on the growth of through-traffic. ST2therefore retains the

background traffic growth forecasts for through-traffic (i.e. that with both origin and

destinations in external zones).

ST2 clearly contains all of the traffic identified in ST1plus additional traffic from the

background traffic growth forecast. Clearly, if the ST1tests show that there is no

spare capacity (gridlock), there is no need to actually perform the ST2as the

outcome can only be worse.


12/71


13/71


14/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

8

that the majority of sites (taken from the TRICS dataset) could not be considered

suitable for use in Bournemouth when comparison was made between the

parameters.

With guidance from BBC, more suitable trip rates were produced through the

collection of surveys conducted at similar sites. Two hotel types were at looked for

Terrace Mount: 2/3 star hotel; and 3 star hotel with conferencing.

As the proposed hotel uses (rating and facilities) at the AAP sites within the town are

not known, an average of the two Terrace Mount examples have been used. The

standard (per room) trip rates for the PM peak are shown in Table 3 below.

Trip Rate Arr ival Departure Total

PM Peak 0.149 0.064 0.213

Table 3: Hotel use PM peak trip rates

These trip rates are lower than those used previously but are considered more

robust as they have been based on more suitable sites.

Using the trip rates from Table 3, the 12 AAP sites which contain hotels produce 251

arrivals and 108 departures (363 in total) in the PM peak. In comparison the original

exercise produced 591 arrivals and 193 departures (total of 784) departures in the

PM peak.

4.4.3 Linked TripsThe assumptions made in the DM0modelling treated all developments in isolation in

order to present a worst-case scenario. However, in order to formulate a more

realistic scenario it is considered that the use of the additional hotels will be

inexorably linked to leisure, retail and employment uses in the town centre.

With Bournemouth being a popular tourist destination it is evident that a certain

amount of trips generated by the proposed leisure will be linked to the new hotels.

Section 4.6.3 describes in detail how the link between the trips generated

by hotels and those generated by leisure developments has been

accounted for in the trip generation exercise

Similarly, hotel trips could be linked to employment, which has been identified to

grow considerably within the town.


by hotels and those generated by employment developments has been

accounted for in the trip generation exercise


15/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

9

4.5 Residential Developments - Trip Generation Review

4.5.1 Level of Development

The Town Centre AAP identifies 22 sites as containing a level of residentialdevelopment which are universally predicted to be flats rather than houses owing to

the intensively developed nature of the town centre.

The 22 AAP sites will provide a total of 2,595 flats (950 of which will be developed by

2016) and development at 13 these sites will also contain other land uses. Not all

residential developments are to be taken forward and the likely residential

development is likely to fulfil approximately two thirds of the total estimate. Trip

generation for each residential site has therefore been factored to 66%.

4.5.2 Residential Characteristics in Bournemouth Town Centre

The 2001 Census Data provides relevant information about the residential population

of the AAP area/ Central ward:

Car ownership levels of all residential units in the AAP area is 48.4%;

74% of the population of the AAP area are between the ages of 18-64

with a further 19.6% above 64.

Economically active population of AAP area is 4,152 or 50% of the total

population;

42% of the economically active resident population (Central Ward)drive to work.

It is evident from the census data that the majority of residents within the AAP area

are young city dwellers, most of whom do not have children with retired residents

also making up a large percentage of the towns demographic. From this it can be

deduced that trip generation within peak periods is likely to be almost entirely made

up of journeys to work.

Trip rates used for the previous study are felt to be a robust assessment of the

potential trip generation for new residential (flats) sites in the town centre. These are

shown in Table 4 below:


PM Peak 0.133 0.064 0.197

Table 4: Residential use PM peak trip rates

4.5.3 Linked Trips

It should be considered that trips from the large number of additional residential units

provided by the AAP will be linked to the proposed town centre leisuredevelopments.


16/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

10


by residential developments and those generated by employment

developments has been accounted for in the trip generation exercise

Similarly, a proportion of new residential trips will be linked to the newly created jobsassociated within the employment aspirations of the AAP.


by residential developments and those generated by employment

developments has been accounted for in the trip generation exercise

4.5.4 Transferred Trips

There are no existing residential units being replaced with new developments (of the

same use) within the AAP sites and therefore no consideration can be given to the

transfer of trips.

4.6 Leisure and Cultural Developments - Trip Generation Review


Winter Gardens

The potential usage identified in the AAP assumptions is for a tourist destination

such as a museum/ gallery or bowling alley.

Bath Road North

An extant planning consent at the site is for a mixed use development centred

around a casino. However, a revised application was received in June 2011 whichwill request a change of main use to a 2,000 seat multiplex cinema. The multiplex

cinema development will only be operational once the existing cinemas (on

Westover Road) have closed. The development will include several restaurant units.

Bath Road South

The timescale of development has been moved back to 2021. The expected use of

the site will be for tourism such as a water based theme park. The majority of trips

from these are expected between 10am and early evening.

4.6.2 Trip Rates

Winter Gardens

Due to the large floor area of the Winter Gardens development site, it is assumed

that more than one use is to be developed. Whilst the end use of the site is

unknown, this study has assumed it will be split between a museum/ gallery and a

bowling alley.

Six town centre sites have been found in the TRICS database for museums and

have been used to calculate expected trip generation for that use, however sites for

bowling alleys within TRICS are limited.

The trip rates (per 100m2 of GFA) for the two uses are shown in Table 5 below:


17/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

11


Museum 0.007 0.098 0.105

Bowling Alley 1.113 1.298 2.411

Table 5: Winter Gardens leisure use PM peak trip rates derived from TRICS

Bath Road North

The extant planning permission at the Bath Road North site is to be considered void

and a new planning application for a complex to contain a cinema coupled with

restaurant uses.

The cinema is to replace the two existing cinemas on Westover Road. It is therefore

assumed that all trips generated by the cinema use will already exist on the network

and that there is no net gain in trips related to this use. The Westover Road site is tobe redeveloped and trips generated by that development will be looked in Section

4.8.1.

Bath Road South

The exact use at Bath Road South is not known however there is an expectation for

this to be a water-based activity centre. The TRICS database does not contain any

relevant sites and as such it is difficult to predict a viable trip rate for the site.

The most appropriate similar use appears to be swimming pool and TRICS has been

used to find town centre based sites for which a trip rate can be generated. These

trip rates are shown in Table 6 below:


PM Peak 1.757 1.861 3.618

Table 6: Swimming Pool use PM peak trip rates

4.6.3 Linked Trips

The AAP estimates that there will a large increase in the volume of hotel rooms in

Bournemouth Town Centre. It is therefore likely that a proportion of new trips to

these developments may already be on the network (as hotel guests). A

conservative estimate would assume that 5%of trips for all leisure developments in

the town centre would be generated by guests staying at the new hotels.

It must also be expected that the users of the proposed leisure facilities will, in part,

be drawn from the local community which is forecast to grow significantly owing to

the residential element of the AAP. This study has assumed that 5%of the trips

generated by leisure will be removed due to the link to residential growth.

The revised planning proposed application for the Bath Road North development

suggests that 20%of the trips generated by the restaurant uses will already exist on


18/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

12

the network in the form of retail or leisure users whilst a further 5% will be linked to

the cinema. These assumptions are carried forward in this assessment.

The identif ied linked tr ips between leisure and other uses are assumed to

already be on the network and have therefore been removed from the

vehicle trip generation for the leisure developments.

4.7 Employment Developments - Trip Generation Review


Eight of the development sites identified in the Town Centre AAP will be completely

or partially employment space. Whilst three sites are expected to provide a like for

like replacement in terms of floor area, the remaining five sites represent an

approximate growth in employment floor space of 42,500m2, almost two thirds of

which is scheduled for development by 2016.

Not all of the employment developments are to be taken forward and the latest

estimates from BBC suggest that the likely cumulative development will fulfil

approximately 85% of the floor space.

To account for this the trip generation for each employment site has therefore been

reduced by 15%.

4.7.2 Trip Rates

The previous studies incorrectly used a trip rate for employment based on a 30

minute time period (1700-1730). The correct methodology would be to combine thetwo 30 minute periods within the peak hour (1700-1800). Previous work has

therefore underestimated the trips produced by employment uses.

Table 7 shows the corrected employment use trip rates (per 100m2GFA) for the PM

peak.


PM Peak 0.206 1.265 1.471

Table 7: Employment use PM peak trip rates

4.7.3 Linked Trips

It is recognised that there is a significant increase in the provision of employment

floor space in the town centre and that the existing population would not be able to

generate the employees to for the scale of created jobs. However, the AAP also

identifies an additional 2,595 residential units in the town centre. The analysis of the

Census Data in section 4.5.2 highlights that the majority of the working residents in

the town are young professionals and clearly this will drive the increase in jobs

created by the AAP sites. It has therefore been assumed that a proportion of the new

jobs will be met by this increase in the local resident population.


19/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

13

This study has assumed that 5%of the trips generated by the proposed employment

developments will be removed due to the link to residential growth.

Similarly, the large increase in hotel rooms planned in the town centre will have an

element that is linked to employment. Four of the AAP sites identified for

employment uses also contain hotel developments which are more likely to result in

linked trips.

A conservative estimate of a 2% reduction in trips generated by employment uses

has been made to account for trips linked to hotel development.

The identifi ed linked trips between employment and other uses are

assumed to already be on the network and have therefore been removed

from the vehicle trip generation for the employment developments.

4.7.4 Transferred Trips

Several AAP developments are located on existing employment sites including those

at Christchurch Road, Wellington Road and the Town Hall Annexe. In terms of floor

area these are expected to be like for like replacements and the most logical

methodology would be to transfer the existing trips onto the new sites leading to no

net-gain in vehicle trips.

4.8 Retail Developments - Trip Generation Review


Within the AAP sites retail development falls within three categories:

As an on-site enabling use for other uses such as employment or

leisure (e.g. Bath Road North;

As a like for like replacement with the existing land use (e.g.

Commercial Road);

As a new/ intensified shopping area (e.g. Westover Road)

Enabling Uses

Commercial units which have been appended to development plans are expected to

be small shops, newsagents or cafs. These will serve the other uses in the samedevelopments as well as those from nearby uses.

Retail Replacement

At certain APP sites, including the large Commercial Road/ Avenue Road, the

proposed retail elements will offer a like for like replacement in terms of floor area.

Although it could be argued that a large improvement in facilities and possibly retail

choices would lead to a larger number of visitors to the town for purely shopping

reasons it is more likely that any additional users of these retail units will already be

shopping within the town, or be generated by the new employment, residential and

hotel uses.


20/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

14

New/ Intensified Area

Westover Road is identified as an area where existing uses (cinema/ bowling alley/

hotel) is to be redeveloped primarily as a retail shopping area (an extension of the

high street) but also to house new hotel, residential and employment uses.

The retail element is in close proximity to the other shopping area within in the town

centre and trips associated with it can therefore be expected to already exist on the

network.

It is therefore acceptable to discount the addition of all trips specifically

related to retail uses in the town centre.

4.9 Adjustment for access to Public Transport

Developments close to Bournemouth Rail Station are typically employment led as

this is the primary area for office space within the town. Developments in thislocation would be more conducive to the business visitors which in themselves are

more likely to be sustainable transport based trips.

A 5%reduction in generated trips in the area surrounding the station has been made

to account for the increase likelihood of the utilisation of public transport services.

The AAP sites affected by this are:

9 Cotlands Road;

10 Asda;

G St Swithuns Road South;

H Wellington Road; and

I St Pauls Place.

4.10 Revised Trip Generation Figures

A summary of the adjustments made to trip generation based on the assumptions

made in Sections 4.4 to 4.9 is shown in Table 8 below:


21/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

15

Land use Reduction factor Reason for Reduction

15%Accounting for expected level of

development compared to potential

5%Generated by new residential

developmentsEmployment

2%Generated by new hotel

developments

Residential 33%Accounting for expected level of

development compared to potential

5%Generated by new hotel

developmentsLeisure

5%Generated by new residentialdevelopments

All 5%Applied to sites in close proximity toBournemouth Rail station

Table 8: Summary of reductions to vehicle trip generation for AAP land uses

The methodology from the preceding text has been applied to each of the AAP sites

and a detailed breakdown by site and use is included in Appendix B.

Table 9 summarises the expected volume of trips produced in the PM peak in each

of the three development periods.

2016 2021 2026 TotalPeak

Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total

PM 394 481 875 160 117 277 169 219 388 723 817 1540

Table 9: Summary of AAP site development trip generation in the PM peak

Table 9 shows trip generation from the AAP sites to be approximately 43% of that

used in the DM0 worst-case scenario for the Town Centre study.


22/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

16

5 Modelling results from sensitivity tests

This section details the results of the sensitivity tests detailed in the Sections 2 to 4.

5.1 Sensit ivity Test 1 (ST1)Table 10 compares 2016 PM peak traffic volumes used in the DM0Origin-

Destination matrix with that in the first sensitivity test, ST1.

2016 DM0 ST1

PM Base Matrix 13,815 13,815

Background Traffic Growth 1,166 0

Development Growth AAP Sites 1,675 2,219

Total Flow 16,656 16,034

Table 10: Comparison of total vehicles flows in 2016 PM peak DMO and ST1 models

The removal of the background traffic from the model is in part offset by the addition

of the NCP Exeter Road and Former Winterbourne Hotel developments which have

now been brought forward to 2016.

Even with all background traffic growth removed, this scenario still forecasts

congestion in the Bath Road/ Gervis Road corridor in the east of the town centre. As

modelled, the network does not have sufficient spare capacity to accommodate the

increased in vehicle trips into the town centre.

5.2 Sensit ivity Test 2 (ST2)

Table 11 compares 2016 PM peak traffic volumes used in the DM0Origin-

Destination matrix with that in the second sensitivity test, ST2.

2016 DM0 ST2



Development Growth AAP Sites 1,675 2,219

Total Flow 16,656 16,339


It is evident from Table 11 that the total traffic volumes in ST2are higher than in

ST1. This means that the issues of congestion which resulted in network failure in

both DM0and ST1would also be forecast in any ST2tests. For this reason the ST2

models were not run and no further results are presented.


23/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

17

5.3 Sensit ivity Test 3

Table 12 compares 2016 PM peak traffic volumes used in the DM0Origin-

Destination matrix with that in the third sensitivity test ST3.

2016 DM0 ST3



Development Growth AAP Sites 1,675 875

Total Flow 16,656 14,690


ST3 represents an increase of 875 vehicles over the existing (base matrix) trafficflows. The AAP sites assumed to come on-line by 2016 are spread relatively evenly

between the centre and eastern side of the town centre.

Approximately 350 of the additional trips arise in the business sector in the

Landsdowne area. Indeed this is where most congestion occurs in the modelled

network. Towards the end of the peak hour (from 17:45) queues are noted on St

Swithuns Road and St Pauls Road as vehicles exit the developments at Cotlands

Road and St Pauls Place.

Although the additional traffic clearly has an adverse effect on delays in the

Lansdowne area, notably northbound on St. Swithuns Road, they are rarely longer

than a minute. Queuing is also seen to increase on Bath Road and Exeter Road

within the town centre.

The model shows little adverse impact in the remainder of the town centre, as

development traffic utilises spare capacity.

5.4 Summary of findings

The assumptions made in Sensitivity Test 3 and agreed with the Council provide a

reasoned methodology for producing a more realistic (i.e. not worst case) forecast

of the level of additional traffic which can be expected to arise from the sitesidentified in the AAP. It does this mainly by considering how developments of

differing land use class would interact with each other and the town centre.

Whereas the previous study assumed that all identified developments would go

ahead, ST3 also takes into account a more rationalised approach on the likely level

of growth in the town centre by establishing that not all developments of the same

type (e.g. three cinema developments) will be taken up.

The trip generation methodology is therefore suitable for use in assessing the impact

of the AAP sites on the highway network in the remaining peak periods and the

further assessment years.


24/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

18

6 Further modelling

6.1 Trip Generation

The trip generation methodology described in Section 4 has been applied to the AAP

sites for each of the four peak hours:

Weekday 0800 0900 (AM);

Weekday 1700 1800 (PM);

Saturday 1400 1500 (SA); and

Saturday 1800 1900 (SAE).

and for each of the assessment years:

2016;

2021; and

2026.

Table 13 below, provides a summary of the estimated arrivals and departures for the

combined AAP sites in each peak period by future assessment year. The cumulative

total for each peak hour is also shown.

Table 13: Summary of development trip generation by assessment year and peak hour

The trip generation profile broken down by site, peak and assessment year is

contained in Appendix B.

The trip rates used for the assessment are provided in Appendix C.

The following sections (6.2 to 6.5) describe the performance of the Do Minimum

modelled network in each of the time periods studied, in 2016, 2021 and 2026.

6.2 Background Traffic Growth

Sensitivity Test 1 explored the impact of assuming that there would be no

background traffic growth over and above the high levels of development traffic

growth originally forecast. It suggested that, in 2016, background traffic growth would

be subsumed within the traffic generated by new development.

The robustness of this assumption for all time periods, and for the modified levels ofdevelopment traffic generation calculated for ST3, has been tested by comparing the

2016 2021 2026 TotalPeak Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total

AM 459 238 698 50 116 166 269 157 425 778 511 1289

PM 394 481 875 160 117 277 169 219 388 723 817 1540

SA 369 457 826 169 159 329 109 139 248 648 755 1403

SAE 317 252 569 123 143 266 114 63 177 554 457 1012


25/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

19

AAP trip generation with the calculated TEMPRO growth, using the most recent

TEMPRO 6.2 forecasts. In each peak period, it was found that the predicted traffic

growth for the AAP developments in 2016 was greater than that predicted by

TEMPRO for Bournemouth. In 2021, the AAP trip generation is roughly equivalent to

that predicted by TEMPRO. However in 2026, TEMPRO derived background growthfor Bournemouth exceeds that predicted by the AAP in each of the peak periods.

Therefore, in order to present a robust and defensible assessment of the

Bournemouth Town centre highway network the future year matrices have therefore

been adjusted to allow background traffic growth to ensure that the total growth is

not less than that forecast in TEMPRO 6.2.

The full methodology and findings are contained in Appendix D.

6.3 AM peak

6.3.1 2016 Do MinimumIn the 2016 AM peak hour the highest additional traffic volumes are generated by the

employment developments in the Lansdowne area and it is on the surrounding

network where queues are observed to lengthen at the Lansdowne and Station

roundabouts. Existing queuing noted at the Bournemouth West roundabout is slightly

exacerbated.

There does appear to be significant spare capacity in the network in the 2016 AM

peak.

6.3.2 2021 Do Minimum

Owing to the type and scale of development scheduled for 2021, the AM Peak seesthe smallest net growth in trips associated with the AAP sites.

There is therefore minimal change between the 2016 and 2021 scenarios.


In 2026 two further developments with high employment floor space are identified in

the AAP at Wellington Road and Asda. The model is characterised by higher queues

and delays on the network surrounding these two developments in the north-east

sector of the study area; principally on Wessex Way and at the Station Roundabout.

Queuing at the Bournemouth West is also worse than in the previous assessmentyears.

However, there is still sufficient capacity on the network, particular in the town

centre.

6.4 PM peak


In the existing situation the weekday PM peak hour contains the highest network

flows and is considered the time period with the highest congestion within the town

centre.


26/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

20

Developments included in 2016 include three significant PM peak trip generators:

Winter Gardens, Cotlands Road and St Pauls Place.

The modelling shows how the additional traffic lengthens queuing and delays along

Exeter Road and Bath Road in the town centre and at the Station roundabout.

However, there is still spare highway capacity throughout the network.


Few of the additional developments scheduled for 2021 result in significant additional

traffic on the network. Only the Bath Road south leisure development appears to be

creating additional delays and these are evident in longer queuing along Bath Road.

There are also significant delays on the all arms at the Station roundabout.

For the remainder of the network there is apparent spare capacity.


In 2026 the entire network becomes significantly more congested in the pm peak.

Issues in the town centre arise from the lack of capacity at three junctions:

Signalised BIC junction;

Bath Road car park access

Russell Cotes Road.

Substantial delay is also noted on Wessex Way and Cambridge Road on the

approach to the Bournemouth West roundabout and also on St Swithuns Road and

Lansdowne Road the Station roundabout.

The congestion arising from these issues causes a state of grid-lock in the model.

6.5 Saturday peak


Whilst the level of additional trips generated by the AAP sites in the Saturday peak

hour is comparable to the PM peak in terms of scale, the baseline network vehiclevolumes are considerably lower than those in the AM and PM peaks.

The highest trip generators from the AAP sites in the Saturday peak are Winter

Gardens and Bath Road north. Although the departures from these developments do

not appear to have significant effect on queues or delay; arrival trips at the two sites

from the east create a lengthening of queues on Bath Road. This may in part be due

to the signalisation of the Bath Road car park access junction.


The issues of queuing at the Bath Road car park access junction noted after 2016

development flows were added is exacerbated in 2021 by the leisure development atBath Road south. The amalgamation of the two Bath Road car parks, as well as the


27/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

21

Pavilion Gardens car park create a substantial number of right-turners from Bath

Road into the car park.

Queues quickly form on Bath Road in both directions approaching the car park

access junction, however it is significantly worse for vehicles travelling into the centre

from the east. By 1430 those queues stretch as far back as the Station Road

roundabout and by 1445 there is stationary traffic from Bath Road to Wessex Way.

A large proportion of the vehicles attempting to leave the car park are not able to do

so within the peak hour owing to a limited amount of green time allocated to the exit

arm.


The causes of the congestion in the 2021 Saturday peak remain in 2026 and indeed

worsen with the addition of the developments at Court Royal, Eden Glen and

Commercial Road. The level of traffic now travelling into the town centre on ExeterRoad gives few opportunities for vehicles wishing to leave Winter Gardens.

The remainder of the modelled network operates with spare capacity.

6.6 Saturday evening peak


Saturday evening has the lowest baseline traffic flows compared to the other three

peak periods, as well as the lowest AAP development trip generation. This results in

the network experiencing little discernable difference in queuing or delays.


Similarly the 2021 assessment shows little additional delay on the network apart

from at the Bath Road car park access junction where queuing is noted on the exit

arm of the car park.


In 2026, these issues are intensified as later AAP developments such as Court Royal

and Eden Glenn create more trips into the Bath Road/ Exeter Road area of the town

centre.

6.7 Summary of Do MinimummodellingAppendix E contains the network summary statistics broken down by peak hour and

assessment year.


28/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

22

7 Possible mitigation measures to be considered:developing the Do Somethingnetwork

7.1 The need for mi tigation measuresThe future year Do Minimummodel tests described in Chapter 6 above show that

the town centre road network will become more congested as new development

takes place. The extent to which this requires, or is even susceptible to, mitigation to

achieve nil detriment across large areas of the network is a matter for the Council to

consider and is beyond the scope of this report. We have, however, considered

possible ways in which the most serious impacts of possible development those

which could cause gridlock or very long queues and delays might be mitigated

through changes at specific locations on the network. This enabled us to create a

future year Do Somethingnetwork

To identify such measures and test their effectiveness in general terms, we looked at

the modelled periods where the biggest problems were forecast the 2021 and 2026

PM peak and the 2021 and 2026 Saturday peak

7.2 Mitigation measures identified by examining the 2021 PM peak

An examination of the 2021 PM peak DMmodel helped us identify a number of

possible network changes which might be required to remove the key congestion

points. These were incorporated into a Do Something (DS) model. The main

changes to create the DS model are discussed and detailed below:

BIC junctionIn the DM model, within the scope of the consented highway schemes the BIC

junction was converted from a roundabout to a signalised junction to provide straight-

across pedestrian crossings on all four arms. These would run in a separate

pedestrian only stage resulting in a loss to traffic of around 30 seconds of green time

in every signal cycle (100 cycle time). The results in substantial queues on three of

the four arms; most noticeably on Exeter Road where queues are shown to block

back as far as the Cambridge Road roundabout by 1730 and to the Bournemouth

West roundabout by 1745. This hinders the operation of the other signalised

junctions on Exeter Road and makes it difficult for vehicles to leave the side roads

(particularly Winter Gardens).

The feasibility of providing signalised pedestrian crossings on two of the arms

appears in doubt (at least without substantial cost) owing to the steep gradient on

Priory Road and the narrow footway width on the car park access road.

The junction modelling software LINSIG was used to investigate a possible

rationalisation of the proposed pedestrian facilities at the junctions and a revised

signal operation has been tested for this junction in the 2026 Do Somethingmodel.

By providing staggered pedestrian crossings (on the two arms where there is

sufficient width for this to be feasible) on Exeter Road and Bath Road the revised

signal timings allow for traffic flow on at least one arm at any time. This results in

significantly less queuing.


29/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

23

Bath Road car park access

In the DMmodel, at the proposed access junction for the Pavilion Gardens

redevelopment the consented scheme design provides signalised crossings on all

four arms at each of the junctions. Combined with the high volume of vehicles

turning right into the Bath Road north (Pavilion Gardens) development this createssubstantial queues and delays along Bath Road.

The signal timings assumed in the DMalso impede the opportunity for the full exit

demand form the car park to leave within the allocated green time. The 2026 DM

model results indicate that approximately a third of the scheduled demand will be

unable to leave the car park in the PM peak. This is exacerbated by junction blocking

from downstream at the Bath Road/ Hinton Road/ Russell Cotes Road junction.

By removing the signalised crossings from these two schemes in the 2026 Do

Somethingmodel and by reintroducing the existing Bath Road pelican crossing

(close to the junction with Westover Road), green time can be reassigned to allow afar higher traffic flow through each junction. The revised signals also allow the full

release of vehicles from the bath Road car park.

Bournemouth West Roundabout

In all the assessment year DM models there are increases in westbound queues on

Wessex Way and northbound queues on Cambridge Road approaching the

Bournemouth West roundabout. In the 2026 PM peak, this queuing is at times,

anticipated to reach as far back as the Richmond Hill roundabout on Wessex Way

and the Cambridge Road junction with Poole Road to the south.

The congestion appears to be caused by demand from straight ahead vehicles on

Wessex Way westbound arm being higher than the available capacity since Wessex

Way westbound has only two lanes, one of which is for left-turns only.

The possible mitigation identified and tested in the Do Something model is to allow

straight ahead movements in both lanes on the Wessex Way westbound arm.

Examination of the performance of the Do Something network shows that, whilst

these proposed changes do not resolve all congestion in the town centre, the main

causes of the grid-locked state predicted in the DM networks are removed. However,

because of the increase in vehicles leaving the town centre, congestion still remains

at the Lansdowne and Station roundabouts in the 2026 PM peak.

7.3 Mitigation measures identified by examining the Saturday peak periods

The cause of the congestion forecast in the 2021 Saturday peak model is evidently

the consented Bath Road car park access junction. To resolve this issue in the DS

network, the signalised junction has been modified as described above for the 2026

PM peak by removing the pedestrian stage and allocating more green time to traffic.

The Bath Road pelican has been retained from the base situation to allow a

continuation of crossing facilities on Bath Road.


30/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

24

Appendix E contains a summary of network performance statistics comparing the Do

Something modelling to the Do Minimummodelling for the PM and Saturday peaks.

7.4 Limitations of work to identify mitigation measures

The possible traffic effects of the mitigation measures described above have been

identified and tested using the available traffic model and at the level of detail

possible in the model, but they have not been subject to any form of design process

to determine feasibility. In particular, no safety audits have been undertaken and the

safety case for amending the design of schemes currently proposed (e.g. deleting

pedestrian phases) has not been considered, nor is any opinion offered on this.


31/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

25

8 Summary and conclusions

8.1 Sensit ivity tests 1 and 2

These tests demonstrated that, with the original worst case assumptions about

traffic generated by new development, removal of some or all of the background

growth forecast in TEMPRO (though a reasonable thing to do in the circumstances)

was insufficient to demonstrate that the network would perform acceptably in the

2016 PM peak.

8.2 Sensit ivity test 3

The methodology for ST3 was more complex than the first two tests and involved a

comprehensive review of the trip generation assumptions made to date in the study

of the Town Centre AAP development sites.

The result of the trip generation review was that theST3test contains significantlyfewer trips than the DM0 scenario. Not only was the total volume of development

growth trips considerably lower than previous assumptions, the additional trips are

spread more evenly across the town centre. This scenario no longer represents a

worst case situation, but it is considered realistic, having been developed in close

consultation with Council officers.

Throughout most of the network in ST3 the development trips have little impact on

queues and delay in the 2016 PM peak and this suggests that there would be spare

capacity for more development traffic.

However, in the Lansdowne area two of the largest development sites, CotlandsRoad and St Pauls Place, are located close to the Station Road roundabout. As

these sites are both primarily set aside for new office floor area, they have the

greatest impact in the 2016 PM peak and result in a combined volume of almost 200

departures. This traffic causes additional queuing and delays on the corridor

between Wessex Way and the Lansdowne Road roundabout in the 2016 PM peak.

The methodology for ST3was then developed to test the other peak periods and

assessment years.

8.3 AM peak

There appears to be sufficient capacity on the network within the AM peak to

accommodate the AAP developments in each stage to 2026.

However, the Bournemouth West, Wessex Way and Station roundabouts all

experience some additional congestion and delay due to the development traffic.

8.4 PM peak

The modelling for the PM peak shows that it will be the most congested time period

for the network once the AAP developments are introduced.

Employment based trips in the Lansdowne area will have a significant effect on allarms capacity at the Station roundabout. Developments in the town centre at Bath


32/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

26

Road north, Bath Road south, Winter Gardens etc will have a significant effect on

flow through the town centre. The cumulative effect of development traffic will also

lead to extreme congestion on Wessex Way at the Bournemouth West roundabout.

By 2026 the effect of the AAP sites will be such that there will be a requirement for

mitigation measures in order to prevent a state of grid-lock.

8.5 Saturday peak

A lack of capacity at the Bath Road car park access junction is the primary cause of

congestion during the Saturday peak hour and by 2021 (and the introduction of the

Bath Road south development) it causes significant queuing in both directions on

Bath Road.

8.6 Saturday evening peak

Compared to the other peak hours, traffic flows on the network are lowest in the

Saturday evening peak. The only point of congestion in the network is the Bath Roadcar park access junction.

8.7 Summary of mitigation and further recommendations

Throughout the modelling of the peak periods and assessment years, several

junctions in the town centre network were repeatedly identified as having limited

spare capacity to cope with the additional traffic generated by the AAP sites.

Committed schemes on Exeter Road and Bath Road, which intended to give greater

priority to pedestrians and traffic flow from side roads were, introduced into the Do

Minimum modelling to represent the network in 2016. However these schemes

linked to the planning consents for Licet, Pavilion Gardens and Terrace Mount were

actually found to restrict traffic flow on the main links.

The following possible changes have been identified to address this problem:

Changes to the signal design and method of control at the Bath Road car park

access junction, the BIC junction and the junction of Bath Road and Westover

Road. All round pedestrian stages proposed at these three junctions could be

removed to decrease the amount of lost green time for traffic.

To reduce queuing at Bournemouth West roundabout, reinstate the straightahead movement on both lanes of the Wessex Way westbound arm.

As noted in Section 7, these potential changes have not been subject to any design,

costing or safety audit as this is beyond the scope of this report.

The changes were tested in a 2026 PM peak Do Something model and a 2021

Saturday peak model, and it was found that they are likely to resolve the issue of

grid-lock in the town centre. However even with these changes, there are still

additional delays to vehicles along Bath Road and Exeter Road and the feasibility of

other measures, notably at the Lansdowne and Station roundabouts and on

Holdenhurst Road on the approach to the Station roundabout, should be studied to


33/71


August 2011


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

27

provide further mitigation. Overall, however, spare capacity would remain in the

network.

The Do Somethingnetworks were created to examine how amendments to the

signal designs could improve traffic flow along Bath Road, Exeter Road and

Commercial Road. However, whilst VISSIM is effective in modelling a road network,

it is recommended that a TRANSYT model is created in order to optimise the signal

timings between these junctions. The VISSIM model can then be recalibrated with

the signal timings to test their effect on the wider network. Although the modelling

shows that the changes to the proposed signal schemes will only be necessary by

2021, it is recommended that the options are redesigned for implementation

immediately.

The large increase in employment space allocated within the AAP developments is

centred on the Lansdowne area located close to Bournemouth Station. The

cumulative impact of the developments at St Pauls Place, Cotlands Road and Asdaresult in congestion at the Station, Lansdowne and Wessex Way/ St Pauls Road

roundabouts, primarily in the AM and PM peak. Opportunities for significant redesign

of these roundabouts are limited by the lack of available highway land. A

recommendation for further analysis would be to test a signalisation of the Station

roundabout using TRANSYT.

It may be the case that some of the DMchanges are no longer required. It is unlikely

the NCP Licet development will now go ahead, and initial plans for a bus hub are

being considered. This may it unnecessary to signalise the junction of Exeter Road/

Exeter Crescent. The signalisation of Bath Road/ Hinton Road/ Russell Cotes Roadseems to provide little benefit other than providing signal controlled pedestrian

crossing facilities. The benefit to pedestrians should be reassessed in light of the

AAP development impact.

It should be noted that the mitigation measures identified above may not be the only

solutions to resolving the issue of additional congestion caused by the development

of the AAP sites. Nor has any detailed assessment been undertaken they have

only been tested in the VISSIM model. Furthermore, the use of the Development

Control process will be paramount in ensuring the level of additional demand created

by the large AAP developments as will mitigation through encouraging the use of

sustainable transport modes.

The results of the modelling exercise and the recommendations made thereafter are

valid for the assumptions made within the current Area Action Plan. It is possible that

the type, scale and implementation date of developments within Bournemouth Town

Centre may change and that planning applications for future schemes may propose

alternative solutions for highway mitigation. Any such changes to the highway

network or the AAP development strategy would need to incorporated into the

VISSIM model for future assessment.


34/71


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

Appendices


35/71


Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

Appendix A

AAP Sites and Trip Rate Methodology


36/71


August 2011

S:\Projects\1035372 Bournemouth VISSIM 2011\09 Documents\09 Final Report\Aug 05 11 - AAP VISSIM Assessment.doc

Mouchel 2011

Site Phasing Development Note

1NCP Exeter

Road2016

Bus Hub

Residential 200 units

The extant planning permission is to be ignored

BBC has identified the site as the location of a ngenerate trips from the buses. No information hreroute through the hub.

Owing to the size of the site, a large residential

2Winter Gardens

+ Priory Rd2016 Leisure/ Cultural use 14,150m2

The site was previously expected to see planniaround a cinema complex. Bath Road North is Winter Gardens available for another leisure usmuseums/galleries in similarly sized towns.

4Bath Road

North2016

Cinema 2,000 seats

Restaurant use 3,500m2

The extant planning permission for a casino is capplication for a cinema multiplex will be submi

The cinema will replace those in Westover Roaalready be on the network.

Restaurant trips will be linked in part to the cineof 25%; but also to all other new developments further 15% reduction in the trip generation.

8 Leyton Mount 2016Residential 85 units

Retail 700m2

The retail element will be small shops or a caftrips already existing on the network.

9 Cotlands Rd 2016Employment 17,000m

2


Revised hotel trip rates used

5% reduction in trip generation owing to proxim

5% reduction in employment trips to be genera


B Punshon 2016Residential 10 units

Hotel 100 rooms


I St Pauls Place 2016Employment 8,500m

2

Hotel 200 rooms


5% reduction on trip generation owing to proxim




37/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

J Maderia Road 2016 Residential 60 units

KRichmondGardens

2016

Employment 1,200m2

Hotel 170 rooms





R Terrace Mount 2016 Hotel 281 roomsResidential 60 units

Trip rates taken from TA

TFormer

WinterbourneHotel

2016 Hotel 200 roomsRevised hotel trip rates used

UHappylands,

Seafront2016 Hotel 40 units


3Bath Road

South2021 Leisure use 4,500m

2

Swimming pool trip rates used.

5% reduction in leisure trips to be generated by

5 Westover Road 2021

Retail 15,000m2


Hotels 50 rooms

Trips associated with retail are considered to be

Revised hotel trip rates used.

6 Central 2021 Residential 200 units

7 Glen Fern 2021Employment 5,000m

2


Employment within the development is treated no net gain in trips.

D Berry Court 2021 Residential 125 units

FChristchurch

Road

2021 Employment 20,000m2

The development is treated as a re-use of the e

GSt SwithunsRoad South

2021 Residential 100 units5% reduction on trip generation owing to proxim

MSt Stephens

Road2021 Residential 45 units

S Durley Road 2021 Residential 70 units


38/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

10 Asda 2026

Employment 8,000m2


Hotels 250 rooms


The retail element is treated as a re-use of the



1% reduction in employment trips to be generaA Court Royal 2026 Hotels 150 rooms Revised hotel trip rates used

C Eden Glen 2026 Hotels 80 rooms Revised hotel trip rates used

ETelephoneexchange

2026 Residential 130 units

H Wellington Road 2026Employment 7,800m

2

Residential 120 unit




L Richmond Hill 2026 Residential 170 unit

N Town HallAnnexe

2026 Employment 5,920m2 The development is treated as a re-use of the e

OCambridge

Road2026 Residential 80unit

PCommercial

Road2026

Retail 8,000m2

Residential 100 unit

The retail development is treated as a re-use oftrips.


39/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Appendix B

AAP Trip Generation


40/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

AM Peak Tr ip Gen erati on

Retail/ Culture/ Leisure Employment Flats Hotels

2016 GFA Arrivals Departures GFA Arrivals Departures Units Arrivals Departures Rooms Arrivals Departures

1 NCP Exeter Road 200 4 21

2 Winter Gardens + priory rd 14150 5 0 150 3 16 100 7 8

4 Bath Road North 13300 existing existing

8 Leyton Mount 80 2 8

9 Cotlands Rd 17000 229 31 250 5 25

B Punshon 10 0 1 100 7 8

I St Pauls Place 8500 115 16 200 13 16

J Maderia Road 60 1 6

K Richmond Gardens 1200 17 2 140 3 15 170 11 14

R Terrace Mount 60 1 6 281 19 23

T Former Winterbourne Hotel 200 13 17

U Happylands, Seafront 40 3 3

2021

3 Bath Road South 4500 23 22 80 5 7

5 Westover Road 11000 existing existing 100 2 11 50 3 4

6 Central 200 4 21

7 Glen Fern 5000 existing existing 155 3 16

D Berry Court 125 3 13

F Christchurch Road 20000 existing existing

G St Swithuns Road South 100 2 10

M St Stephens Road 45 1 5

Q West Hill

S Durley Road 70 2 7

2026

10 Asda 10000 existing existing 8000 108 15 250 6 25 250 16 20

A Court Royal 150 10 12

C Eden Glen 80 5 7

E Telephone exchange 130 3 14

H Wellington Road 7800 111 15 120 3 12

L Richmond Hill 170 4 18

N Town Hall Annexe 5920 existing existing

O Cambridge Road 80 2 8 P Commerical Road 8000 existing existing 100 2 11


41/71


42/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Saturday Afternoon Peak TripGeneration

Retail/ Culture/ Leisure Employment Flats Hotels

2016 GFA Arrivals Departures GFA Arrivals Departures Units Arrivals Departures Rooms Arrivals Departures

1 NCP Exeter Road 200 9 7

2 Winter Gardens + priory rd 14150 64 84 150 7 6 100 15 23

4 Bath Road North 13300 existing existing 8 Leyton Mount 80 4 3

9 Cotlands Rd 17000 250 11 9

B Punshon 10 0 0 100 15 23

I St Pauls Place 8500 200 29 44

J Maderia Road 60 3 2

K Richmond Gardens 1200 140 6 5 170 26 39

R Terrace Mount 60 3 2 281 43 65

T Former Winterbourne Hotel 200 31 46

U Happylands, Seafront 40 6 9

2021

3 Bath Road South 4500 114 100 80 12 18

5 Westover Road 11000 existing existing 100 4 4 50 8 12

6 Central 200 9 7

7 Glen Fern 5000 existing existing 155 7 6

D Berry Court 125 6 5 F Christchurch Road 20000 existing existing

G St Swithuns Road South 100 4 4

M St Stephens Road 45 2 2

Q West Hill

S Durley Road 70 3 3

2026

10 Asda 10000 existing existing 8000 250 11 9 250 37 55

A Court Royal 150 23 35

C Eden Glen 80 12 18

E Telephone exchange 130 6 5

H Wellington Road 7800 120 5 4

L Richmond Hill 170 8 6

N Town Hall Annexe 5920 existing existing

O Cambridge Road 80 4 3

P Commercial Road 8000 existing existing 100 4 4


43/71


44/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Appendix C

AAP Land Use Class Trip Rates


45/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

TripratesusedfortheAAPsitetripgeneration.

AM PM SA

Landuseclass Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total

Employment

(per100m2)1.796 0.246 2.042 0.206 1.265 1.471 0 0 0

Residential

(perunit)0.034 0.16 0.194 0.133 0.064 0.197 0.067 0.056 0.123

Hotel

(perroom)0.067 0.083 0.15 0.149 0.064 0.213 0.154 0.231 0.385

Museum

(per100m2)0.077 0.005 0.082 0.007 0.098 0.105 0.239 0.335 0.574

Bowling

(per100m2)0 0 0 1.113 1.298 2.411 0.766 0.989 1.755

SwimmingPool

(per100m2)0.569 0.547 1.116 1.757 1.861 3.618 2.821 2.469 5.29


46/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Appendix D

Background Traffic Growth


47/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Methodology for calculation of background growth in the future year assessments

TEMPRO 6.2 was used to find the estimated background traffic growth for the modelled area

between the base year of 2008 and the three assessment years, 2016, 2021 and 2026. Table 1

shows the TEMRPO derived growth rates for the Bournemouth and Dorset zones.

AM PM SA

Bournemouth Dorset Bournemouth Dorset Bournemouth Dorset

2008-2016 1.0223 1.0322 1.0231 1.0382 1.022 1.0429

2008-2021 1.0796 1.0962 1.083 1.1078 1.0824 1.1164

2008-2026 1.1417 1.1599 1.1497 1.1785 1.1508 1.1921

Table 1: TEMPRO derived background traffic growth factors

The TEMPRO growth factors have been applied to the base matrix to determine the future traffic

volumes expected in the assessment years.

The matrix consists of: through traffic, that which enters and leaves the network via the zones on

the edge of the model; and town centre traffic, that which has an origin or a destination within the

internal zones of the matrix. It can be reasonably assumed that the only vehicles which can be

though to form part of the growth associated with the Dorset TEMPRO zone would be the through

traffic that enters and leaves the network travelling from east to west, or west to east on Wessex

Way. Therefore the vehicles from those VISSIM zones in the base matrix (401 and 412) have been

growthed using the Dorset TEMPRO calculation. These flows can be considered true external to

external trips. For all other VISSIM zones, the Bournemouth TEMRPO zone growth factor has

been applied.

Tables 2 to 5 compares the AAP trip generation for the future years against the project TEMPRO

growth for each time period.

TEMPRO predicted growth

AM peak External to External Internal related trips Total

PredictedAAP growth

2008 - 2016 60 256 316 698

2008 - 2021 180 914 1094 864

2008 - 2026 299 1627 1926 1289

Table 2: Comparison of TEMRPO derived growth and AAP growth for the AM peak


PM peak External to External Internal related trips Total

PredictedAAP growth

2008 - 2016 77 273 350 875

2008 - 2021 219 978 1197 1152

2008 - 2026 363 1763 2126 1540

Table 3: Comparison of TEMRPO derived growth and AAP growth for the PM peak


SA peak External to External Internal related trips Total

PredictedAAP growth

2008 - 2016 55 242 297 8262008 - 2021 150 906 1056 1155

2008 - 2026 248 1658 1906 1403


48/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Table 4: Comparison of TEMRPO derived growth and AAP growth for the Saturday peak


SAE peak External to External Internal related trips Total

PredictedAAP growth

2008 - 2016 42 181 223 569

2008 - 2021 112 680 792 835

2008 - 2026 137 1292 1429 1012

Table 5: Comparison of TEMRPO derived growth and AAP growth for the Saturday evening peak

In each peak period, the predicted traffic growth for the AAP developments in 2016 is greater than

that predicted by TEMPRO for Bournemouth. In 2021, the AAP trip generation is roughly

equivalent to that predicted by TEMPRO. However in 2026, TEMPRO derived background growth

for Bournemouth exceeds that predicted by the AAP in each of the peak periods.

In order to present a robust assessment of the Bournemouth Town centre highway network in the

future year periods the base matrices have been adjusted to include predicted background traffic

growth which is over and above that of the AAP trip generation.

The external to external trips which enter and leave the network via Wessex Way have been

uplifted to account for what is considered true external growth.

In instances where the internal predicted TEMRPO traffic growth is greater than that predicted by

the AAP site trip generation exercise, the difference between the AAP growth plus external to

external trips and the total TEMPRO growth has been established. This difference can be

considered growth which is occurring in the remainder of the Bournemouth TEMPRO zone (outside

of the town centre) and has therefore been applied to the remaining external VISSIM zones within

the matrix.

Using the above methodology, Table 6 compares the traffic volumes within the base matrices

against the growth factored future year matrices.

2008 2016 2021 2026

Peak BaseBase +TEMPRO

Base+TEMRPO+AAP

Base +TEMPRO

Base+TEMRPO+AAP

Base +TEMPRO

Base+TEMRPO+AAP

AM 13359 13419 14117 13539 14402 13996 15290

PM 13815 13892 14768 14034 15187 14391 15936

SA 12288 12344 13170 12439 13593 12645 14064

SAE 9215 9257 9826 9328 10163 9682 10696

Table 6: Summary of vehicle flows by assessment year and peak period.


49/71


August 2011


Mouchel 2011

Appendix E

VISSIM Modelling Network Statistics

.