appendix 18 stage 1 road safety audit & designers response

APPENDICESResponse
Secondment & Outsourcing
ROOKERY RESOURCE FACILITY GREEN LANE, STEWARTBY STAGE 1 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT 2nd July 2010 Waterman Aspen Limited Lockington Hall Lockington Derby DE74 2RH T 01509 674567 F 01509 674623 www.watermanaspen.co.uk
REV ISSUE STATUS PREPARED BY/DATE
CHECKED BY/DATE
APPROVED BY/DATE
maries
APPENDIX 18.1 TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT
Secondment & Outsourcing Disclaimer note This report has been produced solely for the use of the client and shall not be assigned to, or relied upon by others without the express written permission of Waterman Aspen Ltd.
Secondment & Outsourcing Rookery Resource Facility – Green Lane, Stewartby
1
CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2 2.0 THE PROPOSALS 2 2.1 DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION NOT PROVIDED 3 3.0 ACCIDENT HISTORY 3
AUDITOR’S EVALUATION 4.0 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT 4 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 7 APPENDICES APPENDIX ONE 6.0 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT TEAM STATEMENT 9 APPENDIX TWO 7.0 PROBLEM LOCATION PLAN 10 APPENDIX THREE 8.0 LIST OF DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE AUDIT TEAM 12
2
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report is a Stage One Feasibility Stage Road Safety Audit (RSA) carried out on the above
scheme at the request of Waterman Boreham Ltd. 1.2 The RSA team, staff members from Waterman Aspen, present at the RSA were:
Chris Young AMIHE AMCIHT MSoRSA Audit Team Leader
Peter Chapman B Eng (Hons) C Eng MICE MCIHT
Audit Team Member We confirm that no member of the Audit Team has been involved with the design process
1.3 A site visit was carried out on Friday 2nd July 2010 at 10:00hrs. The weather during the site visit
was overcast with a dry carriageway surface. 1.4 The RSA brief issued to the team comprised various elements listed at Appendix Two. 1.5 The terms of reference of the RSA are as described in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges
HD19/03 – Road Safety Audit. This standard has been used for guidance only. The RSA team has examined and reported only the road safety issues of the scheme as presented and has not examined or verified the compliance of the design to any other criteria.
All of the problems described in this report are considered by the RSA team to require action in order to improve the safety of the scheme and minimise collision occurrence.
PLEASE NOTE: If any of the problems or recommendations within this RSA report are not accepted, a signed exception report is required by the RSA Team Leader.
1.6 No previous RSAs have been carried out by Waterman Aspen. 2.0 PROPOSALS The scheme comprises of the construction of a new priority junction vehicular access to the new
development, with associated localised carriageway widening to facility a new ghost right turn bay within Green Lane.
The unadopted new internal access road is to be traffic calmed along with other associated improvements to non-motorised user facilities on the approaches to the development.
3
2.1 DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION NOT PROVIDED
DEPARTURES FROM STANDARD No Departures from Standard have been highlighted to the RSA team. SWEPTPATH ANALYSIS No details of any vehicle sweptpaths were provided to the audit team 3.0 ACCIDENT HISTORY 3.1 The personal injury accident data supplied within the Road Safety Audit Brief for the period of
January 2004 to January 2009 summarised four personal injury collisions along the section of Green Lane included within this scheme, one of which resulted in a fatality. No collisions were recorded within this period for Stewartby Way.
4
4.0 MATTERS ARISING FROM THIS (STAGE ONE) ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
4.1 Location: Green Lane east of the proposed new development access 4.1 Problem
Summary: Risk of vehicle loss of control type collisions The location of the proposed central pedestrian refuge on the apex of the bend is cause for concern. Site observations showed the majority of vehicles travelling east to west were travelling at elevated speeds and were noted to encroach across the centre line to straight line the bend. As a consequence drivers may not be aware of the presence of the new refuge due to the limited forward visibility available. Recommendation Relocate the pedestrian refuge to the east away from the carriageway bend, and provide colour surface infill within the tapered lead in to the right turn lane to deter vehicles from overrunning this section.
4.2 Location: Green Lane east of the proposed new development access
4.2 Problem
Summary: Risk of pedestrian / vehicle conflict The location of the proposed central pedestrian refuge on the apex of the bend is cause for concern. The presence of a mature hedge line along the northern highway boundary reduces the visibility splays to and from the northernmost pedestrian crossing point. Albeit acknowledged the pedestrian visibility splays to the east are improved significantly when taken from the centre of the proposed pedestrian refuge. Recommendation Notwithstanding the recommendation made within point 4.1 of this report, remove the hedge line overgrowth back to the highway boundary. Note this will also provide increased visibility splays for vehicles exiting the new development access.
5
4.3 Location: Green Lane adjacent to the new site access
4.3 Problem
Summary: Risk of vehicle conflict The introduction of the ghost right turn bay results in the eastbound through lane being reduced to approximately 3.0m in width, this along with the excessive horizontal deflection will result in eastbound traffic overrunning the central right turn lanes to straighten the movement through this section potentially conflicting with other vehicles. Recommendation Provide a central splitter island to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the right turn lane. However ensure the location does not impede the sweptpaths of long vehicles exiting the new development access road.
4.4 Location: Green Lane adjacent to the new site access
4.4 Problem
Summary: Risk of head on type vehicle conflicts The proposed forward visibility splays for right turning traffic into the new development is notably impeded by the carriageway horizontal alignment and presence of a mature hedge line to the rear of the highway boundary. As slow moving right turning traffic may not have an adequate clear visibility envelope to enable them to safely complete the turning movement. Recommendation Remove all the overgrowth to the extent of the highway boundary, and provide warning signage on the westbound approach to forewarn drivers of the pending hazard.
6
4.5 Problem
Summary: Risk of sideswipe type vehicle conflicts Adjacent to the development on the westbound approach to the railway level crossing, is a signed dedicated waiting point for large /slow vehicles to stop and use the nearby telephone to gain permission to cross at the level crossing. Large stationary vehicles at this point will obstruct sightlines for vehicles exiting the new development. Recommendation In the absence of an identifiable alternative suitable large / slow vehicles waiting point, determine the frequency of large / slow vehicles waiting at this location to enable a risk assessment to be undertaken to establish the likelihood of a potential conflict occurring as a result of this issue.
7
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS
1. Green Lane – The carriageway surface for westbound traffic adjacent to the proposed central pedestrian refuge has previously received a reinstatement repair across half of the westbound lane width using two differing material types. The result of the repair has left a section of highway with notable differing Polished Stone Values (PSV). Accordingly the problem raised within Point 4.1 of this report will exacerbate the potential for vehicles to slow suddenly and hence differential braking to occur. Therefore, notwithstanding the recommendation made within point 4.1, as part of this scheme this section of carriageway should be resurfaced to ensure a uniform PSV is achieved.
2. New Access Road - The tactile paving on the inline uncontrolled pedestrian crossing points do
not accord with current guidance with respect to the depth of paving. To clarify a depth of 1200mm should be provided on all inline crossing points.
3. The new divorced footway exit point from the new access road onto Green Lane conflicts with an existing telegraph pole mounted within the centre of the existing footway. Ideally this pole should be relocated to the rear of the footway to avoid causing any obstructions to pedestrians.
4. New Access Road - Within the new access road, immediately adjacent to the proposed
carriageway is a length of low level overhead power cables and lighting present. The lighting and overhead cables should ideally be upgraded or removed as part of this scheme.
5. New Access Road - The presence of central splitter islands within the junction mouths of the
side road accesses at the southernmost extent of the new development access road may impede the movements of long vehicles. Sweptpath analysis should be undertaken at detailed design stage to ensure no potential conflict occurs.
6. Green Lane – The proposed new footway to the east of the new access road on the southern
side of the carriageway runs adjacent to an existing drainage ditch indicated to be regraded. No details have been provided with respect to the regrading of this ditch, however should this ditch present a hazard to pedestrians then a post and rail fence line should be provided to the rear of the footway.
7. Within the Audit Brief the Audit Team were asked also to consider whether the proposed
traffic calming along the private access road is appropriate. Accordingly the Audit Team would not raise any specific safety concerns to the principle of providing traffic calming features along the private access road section. However further details of the proposed layout will need to be provided at detailed design stage such as street lighting improvements and construction details for the priority chicane build outs etc.
The long straight horizontal and vertical alignments of the private access road carriageway will encourage elevated speeds along this section, furthermore the close proximity of the large Stewartby Lake to the carriageway edge is cause for concern should a loss of control incident occur. Therefore the proposed traffic calming is deemed an appropriate measure and hence the Audit Team have not raised any concerns to this principle.
8
Traffic calming is typically provided within 20mph speed restrictions to ensure the speed limit is self enforcing, albeit as this is a private road the design standards do not need to be so rigorously applied as with the public highway schemes. However the addition of 20mph advisory speed limit signs would also assist in reducing vehicle speeds. The combination of both the traffic calming features and an advisory 20mph speed limit will assist in keeping vehicle speeds below 30mph.
8. The Audit Team were also requested within the Audit Brief to consider the location of the proposed pedestrian crossing point adjacent to the new Hanson HQ office development located outside the scope of the Road Safety Audit as detailed on drawing numbered 210010- 05 Rev 0. The Audit Team would not raise any specific safety concerns to the principle of providing a pedestrian crossing facility at this location other than the position appears to be off the pedestrian desire line and as such pedestrians travelling southeast bound are unlikely to use this facility. Accordingly an additional refuge within the southeast taper of the proposed ghost right turn bay would provide a more desirable location to cross with the added benefit of deterring vehicles from overtaking across the right turn bay.
9
APPENDIX ONE 6.0 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT TEAM STATEMENT
I certify that the audit has been carried out in accordance with the requirements set out in HD19/03. The problems identified have been noted in this report together with associated safety improvement suggestions which we recommend should be studied for implementation. AUDIT TEAM LEADER Chris Young MSoRSA AMCIHT AMIHE Signed:........................................... Senior Engineer Waterman Aspen Date:……2nd July 2010 ............. Lockington Hall Lockington Derby DE74 2RH AUDIT TEAM MEMBER
Peter Chapman B Eng C Eng MICE MCIHT Signed: Principal Road Safety Engineer Waterman Aspen Date: 2nd July 2010 Lockington Hall Lockington Derby DE74 2RH
10
11
12
8.0 LIST OF DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE AUDIT TEAM
Drawings
• Summary Personal Injury Collision data
13
14
15
16
17
ROOKERY RESOURCES FACILITY GREEN LANE, STEWARTBY – STAGE 1 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT – 2 nd
July 2010 The following Designers Responses have been provided to the problems identified in the above Stage 1 Road Safety Audit. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE STAGE 1 RAOD SAFETY AUDIT Problem 4.1 Location Green Lane east of the proposed new development access Summary: Risk of vehicle loss of control type collisions The location of the proposed central pedestrian refuge on the apex of the bend is cause for concern. Site observations showed that the majority of vehicles travelling east to west were travelling at elevated speeds and were not to encroach across the centre line to straight line the bend. As a consequence drivers may not be aware of the presence of the new refuge due to the limited forward visibility available. Recommendation: Relocate the pedestrian refuge to the east away from the carriageway bend, and provide colour surface infill within the tapered lead into the right turn lane to deter vehicles from overrunning this section. Response: To accommodate the ghost island right turn lane and the refuge in question it is proposed to widen Green on the southern side. This effectively opens up the forward visibility for road users travelling west bound approaching the refuge. Green Lane as it passes the proposed site access is subject to a 30mph speed limit and in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges TD 9/93, 90 metres stopping sight distance can be achieved on the westbound approach to the refuge. The Design Team consider that this is an acceptable distance for road users to become aware and react to the refuge island. On this basis it is not proposed to relocate the pedestrian refuge. However, the Audit Teams recommendations have been taken on board and coloured surface infill will be provided at the taper that develops around the pedestrian island. This should improve road user awareness of the island and reduce the risk of vehicle collisions. In addition new road layout ahead signs will also be provided for six months after the junction is operational to warm road users of the change of layout. Problem 4.2 Location Green Lane east of the proposed new development access. Summary: Risk of pedestrian / vehicle conflict The location of the proposed central pedestrian refuge on the apex of the bend is cause for concern. The presence of a mature hedge line along the northern highway boundary reduces the visibility splays to and from the northernmost pedestrian crossing point. Albeit acknowledged the pedestrian visibility splays to the east are improved significantly when taken from the centre of the proposed pedestrian refuge. Recommendation Notwithstanding the recommendations made within point 4.1 of this report, remove the hedge line overgrowth back to the highway boundary. Not this will also provide increased visibility splays for vehicles exiting the new development access.
maries
Response: The mature hedge will be trimmed to the back of the publicly maintainable highway in accordance with the above recommendation. This issue can also be considered as part of the Stage 3 Road Safety Audit process. Problem 4.3 Location: Green Lane adjacent to the new site access Summary: Risk of vehicle conflict The introduction of the ghost right turn bay results in the eastbound through lane being reduced to approximately 3.0m in width the excessive horizontal deflection will result in eastbound traffic overrunning the central right turn lanes to straighten the movement through this section of potentially conflicting with other vehicles. Recommendation: Provide a central splitter island to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the right turn lane. However ensure the location does not impede the swept paths of long vehicles exiting the new development access road. Response: In accordance with the above recommendation a new traffic island has been included and the swept path analysis for the largest design vehicle has been undertaken. The swept path analysis clearly shows that the island can be accommodated without affecting the operation of the junction or the through lanes. Problem: 4.4 Location: Green Lane adjacent to the new site access Summary: Risk of head on type vehicle conflicts The proposed forward visibility splays for right turning traffic into the new development is notably impeded by the carriageway horizontal alignment and presence of a mature hedge line top the rear of the highway boundary. As slow moving right turning traffic may not have an adequate clear visibility envelope to enable them to safely complete the turning movement. Recommendation: Remove all the overgrowth to the extent of the highway boundary, and provide warning signage on the westbound approach to forewarn drivers of the pending hazard. Response: In line with the above recommendation the overgrowth will be removed to the extent of the highway boundary to maximise the available visibility for vehicles turning right into the site access. In addition, a junction ahead warning sign will be provided on the west bound approach to the junction at the prescribed distance. The provision of the warning sign will be included as part of the detailed design and can be considered as part of the Stage 2 Road Safety Audit.
Problem 4.5 Location: Green Lane west of the proposed access Summary: Risk of sideswipe type vehicle conflicts Adjacent to the development on the westbound approach to the railway level crossing, is a signed dedicated waiting point for large / slow vehicles to stop and use the nearby telephone to gain permission to cross at the level crossing. Large stationary vehicles at this point will obstruct sightlines for vehicles exiting the new development. Recommendation In the absence of an identifiable alternative suitable large / slow vehicles waiting point, determine the frequency of large / slow vehicles waiting at this location to enable a risk assessment to be undertaken to establish the likelihood of a potential conflict occurring as a result of this issue. Response: Heavy Goods Vehicles currently use the crossing without the need to use the vehicle waiting point. On this basis the dedicated waiting point is only likely to be used by abnormal loads for example those larger than a max legal articulated vehicle. The traffic surveys undertaken as part of the Transport Assessment to support the development proposal do not identify any vehicles larger than an articulated vehicle passing the site.
APPENDIX 19
Predicted Vehicle
Waste Source
(number of trucks per annum / 364 days
minus sundays 52 & 3 bank hols = 309
days)
Bedfordshire Commerical and Industrial Waste 110,000 RCV/Rollon/Skip 8 13,750 1,146 264 44
Buckinghamshire Municipal Waste 146,000 Bulk 20 7,300 608 140 23
Milton Keynes and South Northamptonshire
Municipal Waste 108,000 Bulk 20 5,400 450 104 17
Windsor and Maidenhead Municipal Waste 36,000 Bulk 20 1,800 150 35 5
Other Waste from within Catchment Area 15,000 RCV/Rollon/Skip 8 1,875 156 36 6
Total 585,000 44,850 3,738 863 142
Fuel In
minus 3 public Saturdays & Sundays 104
= 257 days)
Lime Monday to Friday Delivery 10,350 HGV 20 518 43 10 3
Ammonia Monday to Friday Delivery 2,460 HGV 20 123 10 2 1
Active Carbon 330 HGV 20 17 1 0 1
HCI 195 HGV 20 10 1 0 1
NaOH 90 HGV 20 5 0 0 1
Fuel 530 HGV 20 27 2 1 1 Total 13,955 698 58 13 8
Waste Products Exiting
minus public Sundays 52 = 312 days)
Average number of trucks per day
minus 3 public Saturdays & Sundays 104 =
257 days)
Ferrous 3,300 HGV 8 413 34 8 2
Non Ferrous 1,950 HGV 8 244 20 5 1 Total 160,250 8,406 701 162 28
Staff Per day
MRF permanent staff 7
Visitors Per day
Educational Visitors 4 Business Visitors 7 Maintenance Vehicles (cars / vans) 9 Total 20
Summary of total vehicle movements per day:
In Out Total (2-way)
Bulk loaders 59 59 118
Fuel in (HGVs) 8 8 16
Waste Products Exiting (HGVs) 28 28 56
Sub Total HGV 178 178 356
Staff 67 67 134
Visitors 11 11 22
530
Summary of potential Rookery South Resource Recovery Facility vehicle movements - Nominal throughput (585,000tpa)
142 142
Bedfordshire and Luton Municipal Waste
Refuse Collection Vehicle (RCV) - 8 tonne loads Bulk Loader HGV - 24 tonne loadsSkip lorry - 8 tonne loadsRollon Vehicle - 8 tonne loads Fly Ash Tanker - 24 tonne loads
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Rookery Nominal Trip Generation Issued to Covanta 091209_10.03.10_MB
maries
NaOH, Fuel
In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out 2-way In Out 2-way In Out 2-way
24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 6 5 0 0 1 11 12 5 17 0 5 5 12 0 12
6 7 3 3 4 4 10 10 0 0 6 7 30 17 47 17 17 34 13 0 13
7 8 5 6 2 2 10 10 0 0 27 6 44 24 68 17 18 35 27 6 33
8 9 3 3 4 4 1 1 1 1 8 7 1 1 25 10 36 9 9 19 16 1 17
9 10 6 6 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 1 1 16 12 28 11 11 22 5 1 6
10 11 4 4 5 5 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 1 18 18 36 17 17 34 1 1 2
11 12 11 11 6 6 3 3 1 1 1 4 4 1 1 27 26 53 25 25 50 2 1 3
12 13 4 4 4 4 3 3 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 1 1 21 22 43 20 20 40 1 2 3
13 14 6 1 1 3 3 1 1 11 4 4 1 1 16 21 37 15 9 24 1 12 13
14 15 11 11 6 6 0 0 3 3 4 4 1 1 25 25 50 24 24 48 1 1 2
15 16 11 11 6 6 0 0 3 3 1 1 21 21 42 20 20 40 1 1 2
16 17 17 3 3 4 1 1 4 25 29 3 3 6 1 22 23
17 18 15 7 7 0 29 29 0 0 0 0 29 29
18 19 6 4 6 4 10 0 0 0 6 4 10
19 20 6 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 6
20 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
33 33 14 14 23 23 17 17 5 5 44 44 6 6 49 49 7 7 11 11 28 28 8 8 4 4 7 7 9 9 265 265 530 178 178 356 87 87 174
33 33 14 14 22 22 18 18 4 4 43 43 6 6 49 49 7 7 11 11 27 27 8 8 4 4 7 7 9 9
265 266 531 177 177 357 87 87 174
Any mode Any mode HGV Any mode
Total 24 hour
Any mode Any modeHGV
Residues, Ferrous,
Non Ferrous
Municipal Waste
Fuel and Waste Visitors
Covanta - Rookery South - Nominal Throughput (585,000tpa) Monday To Friday except, Bottom & Fly Ash
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Rookery Nominal Trip Generation Issued to Covanta 091209_10.03.10_MB Hourly Profile Mon - Sat
maries
per annum / 52 weeks)
minus 3 public Sundays 52 = 309 days)
Waste Catchment Area 85%
Bedfordshire Commerical and Industrial Waste 128,000 RCV/Rollon/Skip 7 18,824 1,569 362 60
Buckinghamshire Municipal Waste 146,000 Bulk 17 8,588 716 165 27
Milton Keynes and South Northamptonshire
Municipal Waste 0 Bulk 17 0 0 0 0
Windsor and Maidenhead Municipal Waste 0 Bulk 17 0 0 0 0
Other C& I Waste from Waste Catchment Area 371,000 RCV/Rollon/Skip 7 54,559 4,547 1,049 176
Total 645,000 81,971 6,831 1,576 265
Fuel In
Lime 11,385 HGV 17 670 56 13 2
Ammonia 2,706 HGV 17 159 13 3 1
Active Carbon 363 HGV 17 21 2 0 0
HCI 215 HGV 17 13 1 0 0
NaOH 99 HGV 17 6 0 0 0
Fuel 583 HGV 17 34 3 1 0
Total 15,351 903 75 17 3
Waste Products Exiting
Average number of trucks per day
minus public Sundays, Saturdays 104 =
257 days)
Ferrous 3,630 HGV 8 454 38 9 2
Non Ferrous 2,145 HGV 8 268 22 5 1
Total 176,275 9,247 771 178 31
Staff Per day
MRF permanent staff 7
Visitors Per day
Educational Visitors 4 Business Visitors 7 Maintenance Vehicles (cars / vans) 9 Total 20
Summary of total vehicle movements per day:
In Out Total (2-way)
Bulk loaders 27 27 54
Fuel in (HGVs) 3 3 6
Waste Products Exiting (HGVs) 31 31 62
Sub Total HGV 297 297 594
Staff 67 67 134
Visitors 11 11 22
Maintenance 9 9 18
772
Summary of potential Rookery South Resource Recovery Facility vehicle movements - Maximum throughput (645,000tpa)
263 263
Bedfordshire and Luton Municipal Waste
Refuse Collection Vehicle (RCV) - 8 tonne loads Bulk Loader HGV - 24 tonne loadsSkip lorry - 8 tonne loadsRollon Vehicle - 8 tonne loads Fly Ash Tanker - 24 tonne loads
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Rookery Maximum Generation Issued to Covanta 091209_24.03.10_MB
maries
NaOH, Fuel
In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out 2-way In Out 2-way In Out 2-way
24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 6 6 5 5 1 11 18 11 29 5 11 16 12 0 12
6 7 14 14 6 6 6 7 33 20 53 20 20 40 13 0 13
7 8 6 7 0 0 14 14 18 18 27 6 65 44 109 38 38 76 27 6 33
8 9 3 3 17 17 8 7 1 1 36 21 57 20 20 40 16 1 17
9 10 7 7 1 1 17 17 5 5 4 1 1 35 31 66 30 30 60 5 1 6
10 11 0 0 1 1 17 17 5 5 1 1 24 24 48 23 23 46 1 1 2
11 12 7 7 4 4 17 17 1 4 4 1 1 34 33 67 32 32 64 2 1 3
12 13 4 4 17 17 1 4 4 2 2 1 1 28 29 57 27 27 54 1 2 3
13 14 7 0 0 4 4 23 23 11 4 4 1 1 39 43 82 38 31 69 1 12 13
14 15 7 7 23 23 3 3 1 1 1 1 35 35 70 34 34 69 1 1 2
15 16 8 8 16 16 3 3 1 1 28 28 56 27 27 54 1 1 2
16 17 17 3 3 4 1 1 4 25 29 3 3 6 1 22 23
17 18 15 7 7 0 29 29 0 0 0 0 29 29
18 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 20 6 4 6 4 10 0 0 0 6 4 10
20 21 6 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 6
21 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
27 27 0 0 60 60 176 176 49 49 7 7 11 11 31 31 3 3 4 4 7 7 9 9 384 384 768 297 297 594 87 87 174
26 26 0 0 59 59 177 177 49 49 7 7 11 11 32 32 3 3 4 4 7 7 9 9
385 384 769 298 297 594 87 87 174
Time
Municipal Waste Commercial and Industrial Waste Staff Fuel and Waste Visitors
MRF Employees Total Movement Total HGVs Total Cars / LGVsBuckinghamshire
Municipal Waste
Windsor and
Maidenhead Municipal
Total 24 hour
Any mode Any mode
Any mode Any modeBulk RCV/Rollon/Skip RCV/Rollon/Skip
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Rookery Maximum Generation Issued to Covanta 091209_24.03.10_MB Hourly Profile Mon - Sat
maries
Mode split, Distribution and Assignment of workers from Wootton Ward
Modesplit of all workers that work in Wootton
Total Home Tube Train Bus Taxi CarDriver CarPass Mcycle Bicycle Foot Other
Wootton 1530 276 0 15 63 0 955 49 27 57 79 9
Mode Split 100.0% 18.0% 0.0% 1.0% 4.1% 0.0% 62.4% 3.2% 1.8% 3.7% 5.2% 0.6%
Mode split - excluding Home workers & Other
Total Home Tube Train Bus Taxi CarDriver CarPass Mcycle Bicycle Foot Other
Wootton 1245 0 0 15 63 0 955 49 27 57 79 0
Mode Split 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 5.1% 0.0% 76.7% 3.9% 2.2% 4.6% 6.3% 0.00% 100.0%
Analysis of Wootton Ward Census JTW data for persons working in the ward (daytime population)
Assignment of Workers - excluding home
Tube Train Bus Taxi CarDriver CarPass Mcycle Bicycle Foot Other Total
A421 South - towards M1 0 0 6 0 331 3 3 5 3 0 351
West - via Wootton and minor roads 0 0 0 0 93 0 3 3 0 0 99
South on B530 0 0 0 0 65 0 3 0 0 0 68
North on B530 0 0 3 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 43
North on A421 0 15 54 0 426 46 18 49 76 0 684
Total 0 15 63 0 955 49 27 57 79 0 1245
955
Assignment Train Bus CarDriver CarPass Mcycle Bicycle Foot Other Total
A421 South - towards M1 0% 10% 35% 6% 11% 9% 4% 28%
West - via Wootton and minor roads 0% 0% 10% 0% 11% 5% 0% 8%
South on B530 0% 0% 7% 0% 11% 0% 0% 5%
North on B530 0% 5% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3%
North on A421 100% 86% 45% 94% 67% 86% 96% 55%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Model Split of Employee Person Trips
Total Person Trips Car Driver Car Passenger Bus Motorcycle Bicycle Foot Train
In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out In Out
AM Peak 8 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0
PM Peak 0 22 0 17 0 1 0 1 0 0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.3
24 Hours 67 67 51 51 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 4 4 1 1
Assignment
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Rookery Nominal Trip Generation Issued to Covanta 091209_10.03.10_MB 27/07/2010
maries
Car/
8 9 35 7 14 28
9 10 35 14
10 11 35 14
11 12 35 14
12 13 35 14
13 14 35 14
14 15 35 14
16 17 62 255 9
17 18
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 22
22 23
23 24
Vehicle Trips by time period (2-way)
HGV Car/ LGV HGV
Month 5 Month 20 - 28
Time
Depart between 16:00 and 17:00
HGV movements are distributed equally between 07:00 and
16:00 equally
Month 5 Month 20 - 28
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Flow Diagrams_ALL SCENARIOS revised
distribution_24.05.10_MB 27/07/2010
West - via Wootton and minor roads 3.9%
South on B530 8.4%
North on B530 2.9%
Total 100.0% 100.0%
A421 South - towards M1 9 18 37 7
West - via Wootton and minor roads 2 10
South on B530 5 21
North on B530 2 7
North on A421 44 18 179 7
Total 62 35 255 14
PM Peak hour Assignment 16:00-17:00 Month 5
A421 South - towards M1 555 37
South on B530 324 21
North on B530 112 7
North on A421 2715 179
Total
A421 South - towards M1 20 158 84 64
South on B530 12 49
North on B530 4 17
North on A421 97 158 411 64
Total 138 316 584 127
Months 20-28
Employee &
Buses
K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Flow Diagrams\Flow Diagrams_ALL
SCENARIOS revised distribution_24.05.10_MB 27/07/2010
0 25 0 0
0 A 25 97 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 B E
Waterman Boreham Ltd.
Project Checked Approved Brentwood
Essex CM14 4JE Proposed Rookery South Resource Recovery Facility MB MA'L Telephone 01277 238100
Facsimile 01277 238150
210010 - Fig 67
07:00-08:00 AM Peak
0 18 0 0
0 A 18 90 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 B E
210010 - Fig 68
16:00-17:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 B E
210010 - Fig 71
Stewartby
0 7 0 0
0 A 7 3 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 B E
210010 - Fig 72
Stewartby
379 343 150 372 478
D 0 C 4 168 A 0 213
0 A 200 108 44 14
8 12 B 0 299
53 0 0 27 B E
0
325
353 1
373 D
210010 - Fig 73
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
418 324 143 430 478
D 0 C 9 101 A 0 213
0 A 203 148 37 14
59 2 B 0 299
1 0 0 27 B E
0
233
529 129
243 D
210010 - Fig 74
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
A 50% 50%
Essex CM14 4JE Proposed Rookery South Resource Recovery Facility Telephone 01277 238100
210010 - Fig 01
Stewartby
210010 - Fig 02
Northamptonshire & Windsore and Maidenhead Municipal Waste -
Distribution
Stewartby
A 44% 45%
210010 - Fig 03
A 70% 30%
210010 - Fig 04
Stewartby
0 4 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 2 A 0 0
0 A 4 2 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
4
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 07
RCV's, Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 08
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 9 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 9 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
9
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 10
Northamptonshire, Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 11
Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 1 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 1 A 0 0
0 A 1 1 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
1
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 12
Waste - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 1 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 1 1 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
1
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 14
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 4 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
3
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 16
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 17
AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 18
Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 19
Ferrous - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 21
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 23
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 4 A 0 1
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
4
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 24
Stewartby
0 1 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 1 A 0 0 A
0 A 1 1 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
1
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 25
Peak
Stewartby
0 16 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 10 A 0 1
0 A 16 4 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
22
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 26
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 36
RCV's, Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 37
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 39
Northamptonshire, Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 40
Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 41
Waste - 17:00-18:00 Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 43
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 7 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 7 A 0 1
0 A 7 7 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 45
Stewartby
0 3 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 3 3 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 46
PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 47
Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 48
Ferrous - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 50
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 52
Stewartby
0 4 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 4 4 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 53
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 54
Peak
Stewartby
0 13 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 7 A 0 1
0 A 13 13 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 55
Stewartby
430 430 233 357 482
D 0 C 27 77 A 0 209
0 A 201 15 45 14
5 29 B 0 321
53 0 0 44 B E
0
298
360 160
393 D
ALL FIGURES IN PCU's
210010 - Fig 30
08:00 - 09:00 AM Peak
480 570 328 336 570
D 0 C 50 77 A 0 206
0 A 224 15 43 14
4 66 B 0 322
53 0 0 63 B E
0
304
417 293
395 D
210010 - Fig 32
08:00 - 09:00 AM Peak
347 438 186 429 479
D 0 C 14 18 A 0 85
0 A 197 68 36 10
36 6 B 0 509
5 1 0 39 B E
0
277
577 178
338 D
0 104 A
210010 - Fig 59
17:00 - 18:00 PM Peak
276 623 265 452 576
D 0 C 30 18 A 0 81
0 A 212 68 34 10
4 15 B 0 498
9 3 0 53 B E
0
346
644 315
430 D
0 118 A
210010 - Fig 61
17:00 - 18:00 PM Peak
throughput
0 4 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 2 A 0 0
0 A 4 2 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
4
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 07
RCV's, Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 09
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 9 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 9 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
9
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 10
Northamptonshire, Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 11
Bulk - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 4 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 2 A 0 0
0 A 4 2 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
4
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 13
Waste - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 17 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 17 A 0 3
0 A 17 17 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
17
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 15
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 4 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
3
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 16
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 17
AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 18
Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 20
Ferrous - 08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 22
08:00-09:00 AM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 23
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 4 A 0 1
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
4
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 24
Stewartby
0 1 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 1 A 0 0 A
0 A 1 1 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
1
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 25
Peak
Stewartby
0 21 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 26 A 0 5
0 A 21 19 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
28
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 27
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 36
RCV's, Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 38
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 39
Northamptonshire, Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 40
Bulk - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 42
Waste - 17:00-18:00 Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 44
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 7 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 7 A 0 1
0 A 7 7 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 45
Stewartby
0 3 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 3 3 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 46
PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 47
Peak
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 49
Ferrous - 17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 51
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 52
Stewartby
0 4 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 4 4 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 53
Stewartby
0 0 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 0 A 0 0
0 A 0 0 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 54
Peak
Stewartby
0 13 0 0 0
D 0 C 0 7 A 0 1
0 A 13 13 0 0
0 0 B 0 0
0 0 0 0 B E
0
0
0 0
0 D
210010 - Fig 56
Stewartby
430 436 233 357 482
D 0 C 27 93 A 0 212
0 A 206 30 45 14
5 29 B 0 321
53 0 0 44 B E
0
304
360 160
0
210010 - Fig 31
08:00 - 09:00 AM Peak
480 576 328 336 570
D 0 C 50 93 A 0 210
0 A 230 30 43 14
4 66 B 0 322
53 0 0 63 B E
0
310
417 293
395 D
210010 - Fig 33
08:00 - 09:00 AM Peak
347 438 186 429 479
D 0 C 14 18 A 0 85
0 A 197 68 36 10
36 6 B 0 509
5 1 0 39 B E
0
277
577 178
338 D
0 104 A
210010 - Fig 60
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
276 623 265 452 576
D 0 C 30 18 A 0 81
0 A 212 68 34 10
4 15 B 0 498
9 3 0 53 B E
0
346
644 315
430 D
0 118 A
210010 - Fig 62
17:00-18:00 PM Peak
Year base flow calculations
Flows From Highways Agency Model - A421 Imporvement Scheme, Preliminary Design Junction Capacity Study, Nov 2007 NOTE: Don't copy formula's as future figures can be higher or lower
Do Something Most Likely Growth
Northern Marston Moretaine Roundabout Middle Marston Moretaine roundabout Southern Marston Moretaine roundabout
2011 2011 2011
AM Peak A B C D E AM Peak A B C D E AM Peak A B C D
A 0 0 4 0 0 A 0 352 20 0 488 840 A 0 18 28 308
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 417 961 1378 B 26 0 21 693
C 56 667 0 0 725 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 104 35 0 378
D 53 0 273 0 7 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 305 355 137 0
E 0 392 252 0 0 E 0 445 13 84 0 529
0 797 501 1449 2747
PM Peak A B C D E PM Peak A B C D E PM Peak A B C D
A 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 492 26 0 356 848 A 0 21 17 283
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 36 527 657 1184 B 15 0 23 634
C 3 467 0 0 543 C 0 28 0 15 28 C 50 24 0 267
D 2 0 223 0 53 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 278 541 192 0
E 0 400 314 0 0 E 0 519 16 19 0 538
0 1011 546 1013 2570
2018 2018 2018
A 0 0 63 0 0 A 0 322 20 0 477 A 0 45 104 387
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 468 1063 B 81 0 48 731
C 62 665 0 0 741 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 172 39 0 414
D 54 0 251 0 2 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 331 367 131 0
E 0 480 264 0 0 E 0 508 13 66 0
A 0 3 15 0 0 A 0 515 26 0 281 A 0 25 68 440
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 36 617 1174 B 31 0 39 918
C 10 742 0 0 604 C 0 28 0 15 28 C 83 27 0 433
D 9 0 344 0 13 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 339 626 221 0
E 0 276 417 0 0 E 0 670 16 16 0
2014 Flows taken from the difference between 2011 and 2018
2014 2014 2014
A 0 0 29 0 0 A 0 329 20 0 473 A 0 33 61 342
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 428 983 B 50 0 33 709
C 59 666 0 0 732 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 133 37 0 393
D 53 0 264 0 5 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 316 360 134 0
E 0 430 257 0 0 E 0 461 13 75 0
A 0 1 6 0 0 A 0 485 26 0 315 A 0 23 39 350
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 36 552 856 B 22 0 30 756
C 6 585 0 0 569 C 0 28 0 15 28 C 64 25 0 338
D 5 0 275 0 36 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 304 577 204 0
E 0 347 358 0 0 E 0 568 16 17 0
2026 2026 2026
AM Peak A B C D E AM Peak A B C D E AM Peak A B C D A 0 1 76 0 0 A 0 434 20 0 249 A 0 42 149 536
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 577 1139 B 134 0 38 842
C 60 585 0 0 754 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 276 51 0 339
D 51 0 324 0 8 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 361 434 232 0
E 0 480 287 0 0 E 0 594 13 81 0
PM Peak A B C D E PM Peak A B C D
A 0 3 15 0 0 PM Peak A B C D E A 0 52 136 598
B 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 494 26 0 249 B 40 0 30 917
C 10 742 0 0 604 B 0 0 36 744 1190 C 109 33 0 420
D 9 0 344 0 13 C 0 28 0 15 28 D 355 650 221 0
E 0 276 417 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0
E 0 731 16 23 0
2020 2020 2020
A 0 0 66 0 0 A 0 396 20 0 410 A 0 44 138 499
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 539 1098 B 121 0 46 814
C 62 645 0 0 744 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 250 48 0 395
D 53 0 269 0 4 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 354 417 207 0
E 0 480 270 0 0 E 0 561 13 76 0
PM Peak A B C D E PM Peak A B C D
A 0 3 15 0 0 PM Peak A B C D E A 0 45 119 559
B 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 493 26 0 264 B 38 0 37 918
C 10 742 0 0 604 B 0 0 36 699 1163 C 103 32 0 430
D 9 0 344 0 13 C 0 28 0 15 28 D 351 644 221 0
E 0 276 417 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0
E 0 700 16 21 0
A = Lower Selton Road, B = New A421on slip, C = A421 Over-bridge, D =
A421 Eastound Off slip, E = Beancroft Road
A = New A421 Westbound offslip, B = Southern Roundabout link, C =
Services D= A421 Westbound Onslip, E= A421 Over-bridge
A = Old A421 Westbound, B = Beancroft Road, C= Old A421 Eastbound, D=
Middle Roundabout link
Flows From Highways Agency Model - A421 Imporvement Scheme, Preliminary Design Junction Capacity Study, Nov 2007
Fileds Road Junction, Northern roundabout Marsh Leys Junction Green Lane/ A421 junction
A= A421 Southbound, B= Green Lane, C= A421 Northbound
2011 2011 2011 plus NIRAH
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C D E F AM Peak A B C 2010 ATC PCU
A 0 222 220 A 0 303 14 208 479 0 A 0 0 183 Green Lane
B 523 0 242 B 463 0 75 212 0 704 B 0 0 100% Northbound 163
C 104 134 0 C 10 42 0 10 39 10 C 177 100% 0 southbound 142
D 103 436 16 0 27 84
E 368 0 45 0 0 248
F 0 856 14 102 375 0
A421 Information based on HA's drawings Fig 2f
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C D E F PM Peak A B C 2010 ATC PCU
A 0 366 136 A 0 514 10 86 452 0 A 0 0 160 Green Lane
B 394 0 150 B 277 0 46 309 0 725 B 0 0 100% Northbound 96
C 176 138 0 C 32 78 0 56 87 54 C 135 100% 0 southbound 94
D 125 282 22 0 23 213
E 431 0 37 0 0 408
F 0 797 28 134 301 0
2018 2018 Distribution based on Fig 2e
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C D E F 2011
A 0 255 234 A 0 334 14 207 484 0 AM Peak A B C
B 600 0 402 B 471 0 74 221 0 728 A 0 0 100%
C 216 193 0 C 10 44 0 10 41 10 B 0 0
D 106 495 21 0 67 172 C 64% 0
E 342 0 44 0 0 297
F 0 857 15 77 442 0
PM Peak A B C
A 0 381 156 PM Peak A B C D E F Distribution based on Fig 2f
B 477 0 242 A 0 503 10 82 514 0 PM Peak A B C
C 209 224 0 B 265 0 44 314 0 838 A 0 0 100%
C 31 80 0 57 89 52 B 0 0
D 138 514 23 0 10 196 C 65% 0
E 427 0 35 0 0 416
F 0 877 27 136 359 0
2014 2014
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C D E F Information based on HA's drawings Fig D28A_FINAL 190907
A 0 236 226 A 0 321 14 208 482 0 2018
B 556 0 311 B 468 0 75 217 0 718 AM Peak A B C A421 (east)
C 152 159 0 C 10 43 0 10 40 10 A 0 0 300 Westbound 300
D 105 470 19 0 50 134 B 0 0 A421 (west)
E 357 0 45 0 0 276 C 371 0 Eastboud 580
F 0 857 15 88 413 0 Green Lane
Northbound 260
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C D E F Southbound
A 0 372 145 A 0 509 10 84 479 0 Information based on HA's drawings Fig D29A_FINAL 190907
B 430 0 189 B 272 0 45 311 0 773
C 190 175 0 C 32 79 0 56 88 53 PM Peak A B C A421 (east)
D 131 381 22 0 17 206 A 0 0 220 Westbound 220
E 429 0 36 0 0 411 B 0 0 A421 (west)
F 0 831 28 135 326 0 C 299 0 Eastbound 460
2026 2026
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C D E F A 0 276 260 A 0 287 13 199 598 0
B 666 0 513 B 376 0 70 219 0 900 2014 Growth
C 333 325 0 C 10 16 0 7 11 11 AM Peak A B C 2010 -2014 1.1236
D 138 514 23 0 10 196 A 0 233 Green Lane
E 319 0 38 0 0 372 B 0 183 Northbound 183
F 0 964 14 123 464 0 C 260 215 0 Southbound 215
PM Peak A B C
A 0 413 264 PM Peak A B C D E F
B 532 0 363 A 0 483 10 73 597 0
C 321 341 0 B 213 0 43 329 0 952 Growth
C 48 85 0 65 85 36 PM Peak A B C 2010 -2014 1.1305
D 135 369 23 0 10 214 A 0 186 Green Lane
E 460 0 32 0 0 413 B 0 174 Northbound 174
F 0 951 26 119 425 0 C 205 114 0 Southbound 114
2020
AM Peak A B C 2020 Information based on HA's drawings Fig D46A_FINAL190907
A 0 271 254 AM Peak A B C D E F 2026
B 650 0 485 A 0 322 14 205 570 0 AM Peak A B C A421 (east)
C 304 292 0 B 447 0 73 221 0 857 A 0 0 410 Westbound 410
C 10 37 0 9 34 10 B 0 0 A421 (west)
D 130 509 23 0 24 190 C 506 0 Eastboud 790
E 336 0 43 0 0 353 Green Lane
PM Peak A B C F 0 937 15 112 459 0 Northbound 320
A 0 405 237
B 518 0 333 PM Peak A B C D E F Information based on HA's drawings Fig D47A_FINAL 190907
C 293 312 0 A 0 498 10 80 576 0 Percentage split
B 252 0 44 325 0 924 PM Peak A B C A421 (east)
C 44 84 0 63 88 48 A 0 0 400 Westbound 400
D 137 478 23 0 10 210 B 0 0 A421 (west)
E 452 0 34 0 0 415 C 351 0 Eastbound 540
F 0 933 27 132 409 0 Green Lane
Northbound 440
2020 Growth
A 0 0 328 Green Lane
B 0 0 207 Northbound 207
C 405 236 0 Southbound 236
Growth
A 0 0 265 Green Lane
B 0 0 189 Northbound 189
C 312 129 0 Southbound 129
A = Old A421 Southbound, B= Roundabout Link Westbound, C=
Old A421 Northbound A = A5134, B = New A421 Westbound off slip, C = Marsh Leys
Industrial Estate, D = Old A421 Eastbound, E = New A421
Eastbound Offslip, F = Bedford Western Bypass
Green Lane based on ATC 1 info, A421 & % Split
Information based on HA's drawings Fig 2e
maries
Distribution based on HA's Base 2005 flows
B530/ Stewartby Way A421/ Bedford Road Green Lane/ Site Access
A= B530 Northbound, B= Stweartby Way, C= B530 Southbound
Bedford Road Nominal Throughput Growth
2005 Percentage split 2011 30 NB 2014 2010 -2014 1.1236
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C 10 SB AM Peak A B C ATC (Mid)
A 0 7% 93% A 0 10 340 A421 A 0 128 A-C 148
B 0 B 40 0 0 350 EB B C-A 128
C 80% 20% 0 C 310 0 0 350 WB C 148 0
Growth
Percentage split Bedford Road 2014 2010 -2014 1.1305
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C 30 NB PM Peak A B C ATC (Mid)
A 0 13% 87% A 0 10 320 10 SB A 0 103 A-C 103
B B 30 0 0 A421 B C-A 142
C 84% 16% 0 C 320 0 0 350 EB C 142 0
330 WB
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D10A_FINAL 190907 Bedford Road Nominal Throughput Growth
2011 2018 50 NB 2020 2010 -2020 1.2693
AM Peak A B C B530 (north) AM Peak A B C 50 SB AM Peak A B C ATC (Mid)
A 0 48 642 Northbound 720 A 0 50 510 A421 A 0 167 A-C 167
B 6 0 78 Southbound 680 B 50 0 0 580 EB B C-A 145
C 544 136 0 B530 (south) C 530 0 0 560 WB C 145 0
Northbound 690
Southbound 550
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D11A_FINAL 190907 Bedford Road Growth
Percentage split 50 NB 2020 2010 -2020 1.2883
PM Peak A B C B530 (north) PM Peak A B C 20 SB PM Peak A B C ATC (Mid)
A 0 53 357 Northbound 640 A 0 20 540 A421 A 0 117 A-C 117
B 88 0 283 Southbound 610 B 50 0 0 460 EB B C-A 162
C 512 98 0 B530 (south) C 410 0 0 560 WB C 162 0
Northbound 410
Southbound 600
Maximum Throughput
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D28_FINAL 190907 AM Peak A B C
2018 2014 A 0 10 340
AM Peak A B C B530 (north) AM Peak A B C B 40 0 0
A 0 58 772 Northbound 810 A 0 27 413 C 310 0 0
B 76 0 38 Southbound 880 B 44 0 0
C 704 176 0 B530 (south) C 404 0 0
Northbound 830
Southbound 780
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D29A_FINAL190907 PM Peak A B C
Percentage split A 0 10 320
PM Peak A B C B530 (north) PM Peak A B C B 30 0 0
A 0 77 513 Northbound 760 A 0 14 414 C 320 0 0
B 18 0 247 Southbound 800 B 39 0 0
C 672 128 0 B530 (south) C 359 0 0
Northbound 590
Southbound 690
Bedford Road
2014 2026 100 NB
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C 50 SB
A 0 53 698 A 0 50 680 A421
B 36 0 96 B 100 0 0 790 EB
C 613 153 0 C 690 0 0 730 WB
Bedford Road
60 NB
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C 60 SB
A 0 63 424 A 0 60 780 A421
B 58 0 268 B 60 0 0 540 EB
C 581 111 0 C 480 0 0 840 WB
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D46A_FINAL 190907
2026 2020
AM Peak A B C B530 (north) AM Peak A B C
A 0 70 930 Northbound 930 A 0 50 553
B 24 0 0 Southbound 870 B 63 0 0
C 696 174 0 B530 (south) C 570 0 0
Northbound 1000
Southbound 720
Information based on HA's drawings Fig D47A_FINAL190907
Percentage split PM Peak A B C
PM Peak A B C B530 (north) A 0 30 600
A 0 92 618 Northbound 720 B 53 0 0
B 19 0 102 Southbound 870 C 428 0 0
C 731 139 0 B530 (south)
Northbound 710
Southbound 750
A 0 67 890
B 63 0 29
C 702 176 0
A 0 88 592
B 18 0 211
C 716 136 0
A= Green Lane (east), B= Site Access, C= Green Lane (west)
Information based on HA's drawings Fig
D11A_FINAL 190907
D28_FINAL 190907
D29A_FINAL 190907
D47A_FINAL 190907
D46A_FINAL190907
Information based on HA's drawings Fig
D10A_FINAL 190907
Construction Year 2012 NOTE: Don't copy formula's as future figures can be higher or lower
Northern Marston Moretaine Roundabout Middle Marston Moretaine roundabout Southern Marston Moretaine roundabout
2012 2012 2012
A 0 0 12 0 0 A 0 356 20 0 490 A 0 14 17 297
B 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 33 410 946 B 18 0 17 688
C 55 667 0 0 723 C 0 17 0 11 32 C 94 34 0 373
D 53 0 276 0 8 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 301 353 138 0
E 0 379 250 0 0 E 0 436 13 87 0
PM Peak A B C D E
A 0 0 2 0 0 PM Peak A B C D E PM Peak A B C D
B 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 489 26 0 367 A 0 20 10 261
C 2 428 0 0 534 B 0 0 36 514 583 B 13 0 21 593
D 1 0 206 0 59 C 0 28 0 15 28 C 45 24 0 243
E 0 418 299 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 D 269 529 188 0
E 0 497 16 19 0
B530/ Stewartby Way A421/ Bedford Road Green Lane/ Site Access
A= B530 Northbound, B= Stweartby Way, C= B530 Southbound
2012 2012 2012 Growth
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C 2010 -2012 1.0611
A 0 47 623 A 0 4 316 A 0 0 140 ATC (Mid)
B 16 0 67 B 39 0 0 B 0 0 0 A-C 140
C 521 130 0 C 279 0 0 C 121 0 0 C-A 121
Growth
PM Peak A B C 2010 -2012 1.0646
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C A 0 97 ATC (Mid)
A 0 50 334 A 0 9 289 B 0 0 A-C 97
B 78 0 278 B 27 0 0 C 134 0 0 C-A 134
C 490 93 0 C 307 0 0
Marsh Leys Junction Green Lane/ A421 junction
A= A421 Southbound, B= Green Lane, C= A421 Northbound
Fileds Road Junction, Northern roundabout
2012 Growth
A 0 150 Green Lane
2012 2012 B 0 173 Northbound 173
AM Peak A B C AM Peak A B C D E F C 232 206 0 Southbound 206
A 0 217 218 A 0 299 14 208 478 0
B 512 0 219 B 462 0 75 211 0 701
C 88 126 0 C 10 42 0 10 39 10
D 103 428 15 0 21 71 Growth
E 372 0 44 0 0 241 PM Peak A B C 2010 -2012 1.0646
F 0 856 14 106 365 0 A 143 Green Lane
B 0 167 Northbound 167
PM Peak A B C PM Peak A B C D E F C 88 108 0 Southbound 108
A 0 364 133 A 0 512 10 85 443 0
B 382 0 137 B 279 0 46 308 0 709
C 171 126 0 C 32 78 0 56 87 54
D 123 249 22 0 25 215
E 430 0 37 0 0 407
F 0 786 28 134 293 0
A = A5134, B = New A421 Westbound off slip, C = Marsh Leys
Industrial Estate, D = Old A421 Eastbound, E = New A421
A= A421 Southbound, B= Bedford Road, C= A421 Northbound A= Green Lane (east), B= Site Access, C= Green Lane (west)
A = Lower Selton Road, B = New A421on slip, C = A421 Over-bridge, D = A = New A421 Westbound offslip, B = Southern Roundabout link, C = A = Old A421 Westbound, B = Beancroft Road, C= Old A421 Eastbound, D=
A = Old A421 Southbound, B= Roundabout Link Westbound, C=
maries
2010 - 2012 2010 - 2014 2010 - 2020
Dataset Version: 54 Dataset Version: 54 Dataset Version: 54
Result Type: Trip ends by time period Result Type: Trip ends by time period Result Type: Trip ends by time period
Base Year: 2010 Base Year: 2010 Base Year: 2010
Future Year: 2012 Future Year: 2014 Future Year: 2020
Trip Purpose Group: All purposes Trip Purpose Group: All purposes Trip Purpose Group: All purposes
Time Period: Weekday AM peak period (0700 - 0959) Time Period: Weekday AM peak period (0700 - 0959) Time Period: Weekday AM peak period (0700 - 0959)
Trip End Type: Origin/Destination Trip End Type: Origin/Destination Trip End Type: Origin/Destination
Alternative Assumptions applied: No Alternative Assumptions applied: No Alternative Assumptions applied: No
Level Area Local Growth Figure Level Area Local Growth Figure Level Area Local Growth Figure
09UD5 Wootton nr Bedford 1.06112618 09UD5 Wootton nr Bedford 1.123581471 09UD5 Wootton nr Bedford 1.269286931
Time Period: Weekday PM peak period (1600 - 1859) Time Period: Weekday PM peak period (1600 - 1859) Time Period: Weekday PM peak period (1600 - 1859)
Time Period: Average Weekday Time Period: Average Day Time Period: Average Day
maries
RRF Site Access Layout & Geometry Plan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRL TRL Viewer 3.2 AG K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Green Lane_Site Access junction\AM.vpo - Page 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRL LIMITED (C) COPYRIGHT 2006 CAPACITIES, QUEUES, AND DELAYS AT 3 OR 4-ARM MAJOR/MINOR PRIORITY JUNCTIONS PICADY 5.1 ANALYSIS PROGRAM RELEASE 4.0 (SEPT 2008) ADAPTED FROM PICADY/3 WHICH IS CROWN COPYRIGHT BY PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO -------------------------------------------------------- FOR SALES AND DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION, PROGRAM ADVICE AND MAINTENANCE CONTACT: TRL SOFTWARE BUREAU TEL: CROWTHORNE (01344) 770758, FAX: 770356 EMAIL: [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------- THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF HIS/HER RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION Run with file:- "K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Green Lane_Site Access junction\AM.vpi" (drive-on-the-left) at 10:01:00 on Monday, 26 July 2010
RUN INFORMATION *************** RUN TITLE : Green Lane, Site access LOCATION : DATE : 09/04/10 CLIENT : ENUMERATOR : joeh [WB22] JOB NUMBER : STATUS : DESCRIPTION :
MAJOR/MINOR JUNCTION CAPACITY AND DELAY *************************************** INPUT DATA ---------- MAJOR ROAD (ARM C) --------------------- MAJOR ROAD (ARM A) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD (ARM B) ARM A IS Green Lane E ARM B IS Site Access ARM C IS Green Lane W
STREAM LABELLING CONVENTION --------------------------- STREAM A-B CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM A TO ARM B STREAM B-AC CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM B TO ARM A AND TO ARM C ETC.
maries
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRL TRL Viewer 3.2 AG K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Green Lane_Site Access junction\AM.vpo - Page 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GEOMETRIC DATA -------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I DATA ITEM I MINOR ROAD B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I TOTAL MAJOR ROAD CARRIAGEWAY WIDTH I ( W ) 6.00 M. I I CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I I I I I MAJOR ROAD RIGHT TURN - WIDTH I (WC-B) 3.50 M. I I - VISIBILITY I (VC-B) 70.00 M. I I - BLOCKS TRAFFIC I NO I I I I I MINOR ROAD - VISIBILITY TO LEFT I (VB-C) 42.0 M. I I - VISIBILITY TO RIGHT I (VB-A) 34.0 M. I I - LANE 1 WIDTH I (WB-C) 4.80 M. I I - LANE 2 WIDTH I (WB-A) 0.00 M. I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .SLOPES AND INTERCEPT -------------------- (NB:Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted) --------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing I I STREAM B-C STREAM A-C STREAM A-B I --------------------------------------------------------- I 761.64 0.30 0.12 I --------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM B-A STREAM A-C STREAM A-B STREAM C-A STREAM C-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 599.47 0.28 0.11 0.17 0.39 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing I I STREAM C-B STREAM A-C STREAM A-B I --------------------------------------------------------- I 701.44 0.27 0.27 I --------------------------------------------------------- (NB These values do not allow for any site specific corrections)
TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------------------- ----------------------- I ARM I FLOW SCALE(%) I ----------------------- I A I 100 I I B I 100 I I C I 100 I -----------------------
Demand set: Construction Traffic TIME PERIOD BEGINS 07.45 AND ENDS 09.15 LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD - 90 MIN. LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - 15 MIN.
DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 2.01 I 3.02 I 2.01 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 1.75 I 2.63 I 1.75 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 4.74 I 7.11 I 4.74 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRL TRL Viewer 3.2 AG K:\TEAM_D\210010 - Rookery Resource Recovery Facility\CALCS\Green Lane_Site Access junction\AM.vpo - Page 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Demand set: Construction Traffic ----------------------------------------------------------- I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I -------------------------------------- I TIME I FROM/TO I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ----------------------------------------------------------- I 07.45 - 08.00 I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.000 I 0.068 I 0.932 I I I I 0.0 I 11.0 I 150.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.129 I 0.000 I 0.871 I I I I 18.0 I 0.0 I 122.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.612 I 0.388 I 0.000 I I I I 232.0 I 147.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I ----------------------------------------------------------- TURNING PROPORTIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA
QUEUE AND DELAY INFORMATION FOR EACH 15 MIN TIME SEGMENT -------------------------------------------------------- FOR COMBINED DEMAND SETS AND FOR TIME PERIOD 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUEUE FOR STREAM B-AC ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 08.00 0.2 08.15 0.2 08.30 0.3 08.45 0.3 09.00 0.2 09.15 0.2
QUEUE FOR STREAM C-B ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 08.00 0.2 08.15 0.2 08.30 0.3 08.45 0.3 09.00 0.3 09.15 0.2
QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD -------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I STREAM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I----------------------------------------------------------------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I B-AC I 192.7 I 128.5 I 21.3 I 0.11 I 21.3 I 0.11 I I C-A I 319.3 I 212.9 I I I I I I C-B I 202.3 I 134.9 I 23.1 I 0.11 I 23.1 I 0.11 I I A-B I 15.1 I 10.1 I I I I I I A-C I 206.5 I 137.6 I I I I I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ALL I 936.0 I 624.0 I 44.4 I 0.05 I 44.4 I 0.05 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD * THESE WILL ONLY BE

appendix 18 stage 1 road safety audit & designers response

Documents