Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding...Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding Bid...

$: Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding...Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding Bid 291073/ITD/ITW/7/B 1 September 2011 P:\Southampton\ITW\Projects\291073 cpr 2011\wp\CPR_BAFFB$
Camborne Pool Redruth -Best and Final FundingSummary Annex - Value for Money Case

September 2011Cornwall Council

291073 ITD ITW 7 B

P:\Southampton\ITW\Projects\291073 cpr 2011\wp\CPR_BAFFB SummaryAnnex ValueForMoneyCase doc

1 September 2011

Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding

Summary Annex - Value for Money Case

September 2011

Cornwall Council

Mott MacDonald, Stoneham Place, Stoneham Lane, Southampton SO50 9NW, United Kingdom T +44(0) 23 8062 8800 F +44(0) 23 8062 8801, W www.mottmac.com

Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding Bid

Mott MacDonald, Stoneham Place, Stoneham Lane, Southampton SO50 9NW, United Kingdom T +44(0) 23 8062 8800 F +44(0) 23 8062 8801, W www.mottmac.com

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description

A September 2011 GS IJ IJ First Issue

B September 2011 NY JF JF Updated table 1.1

Issue and revision record

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.

291073/ITD/ITW/7/B 1 September 2011 P:\Southampton\ITW\Projects\291073 cpr 2011\wp\CPR_BAFFB SummaryAnnex_ValueForMoneyCase.doc


Chapter Title Page

1. Introduction 1

2. Traffic Surveys 2

3. Assignment Model Validation 2

3.1 Highway Network Updates_____________________________________________________________ 2

3.2 Public Transport Network Updates ______________________________________________________ 2

3.3 Generalised Cost Parameters __________________________________________________________ 2

3.4 2010 Matrix Building__________________________________________________________________ 2

3.5 2010 Validation _____________________________________________________________________ 2

4. Demand Model 2

5. Traffic Forecasts 2

5.1 Forecast Years______________________________________________________________________ 2

5.2 Forecast Networks ___________________________________________________________________ 2

5.3 Forecast Matrices____________________________________________________________________ 2

5.3.1 Highway matrices____________________________________________________________________ 2

5.3.2 Public Transport Matrices _____________________________________________________________ 2

5.3.3 Demand Model Set-up ________________________________________________________________ 2

5.3.4 Sensitivity Tests _____________________________________________________________________ 2

6. Scheme Cost Changes 2

6.1 Current Scheme Costs________________________________________________________________ 2

6.2 Changes to Scheme Costs since Programme Entry _________________________________________ 2

7. Economic Assessment 2

7.1 TUBA assessments __________________________________________________________________ 2

7.2 COBA assessments__________________________________________________________________ 2

7.3 Other economic assessments __________________________________________________________ 2

7.3.1 Reliability __________________________________________________________________________ 2

7.3.2 Wider Impacts ______________________________________________________________________ 2

7.3.3 Scheme Dependent Development Benefits________________________________________________ 2

8. Overall Scheme Benefit Cost Ratio 2

9. Sensitivity Tests 2

10. Summary 2

Appendices 2Appendix A. Checklist of appraisal and modelling supporting material _____________________________________ 2

Content



Tables

Table 1.1: Basis of AST Sub-objective reporting ____________________________________________________ 1 Table 6.1: Scheme Costs ______________________________________________________________________ 2 Table 6.2: Changes in Scheme Costs ____________________________________________________________ 2 Table 9.1: Tuba Benefits Core Strategy with OP and Reliability ________________________________________ 2 Table 9.2: Tuba Benefits Compared for Core Strategy and Central Case _________________________________ 2


1


In February 2011, the Camborne Pool Redruth Transport Package was promoted to the Development Pool following a successful Expression of Interest in January 2011. A Best and Final Funding Bid (BAFFB) will be submitted to the Department for Transport (DfT) by 09 September 2011.

The project received programme entry in 2008. Funding is now being sought for a project with a reduced scope, and the traffic and economic assessments are being updated to meet the requirements of Value for Money Guidance issued by the DfT in May 2011.

The Value for Money Case summarises how the modelling and appraisal for the Camborne Pool Redruth Transport Package has been updated since programme entry. The AST sub-objectives table shown below indicates whether there have been any changes made since 2008.

Table 1.1: Basis of AST Sub-objective reporting

AST Main Objective AST Sub-Objective As 2008 submission?

Location of Update

Business users & transport providers

No

Reliability impact on Business users

No

BAFFB Modelling Reports

Regeneration No BAFFB

Economy

Wider Impacts No BAFFB Modelling Reports

Noise Yes

Air Quality Yes

Greenhouse gases Yes

Landscape Yes

Townscape Yes

Heritage of Historic resources Yes

Biodiversity Yes

Environmental

Water Environment Yes

Commuting and Other users No Reliability impact on Commuting and Other users

No


Physical activity Yes

Journey quality Yes

Accidents Yes

Security Yes

Access to services Yes

Affordability Yes

Severance Yes

Social

Option values Yes

Cost to Broad Transport Budget No Public Accounts

Indirect Tax Revenues No


1. Introduction


2


The changes are split into five sections representing the inputs to the five traffic modelling and appraisal supporting documents and a separate chapter on the scheme costs, i.e.:

Traffic Surveys Assignment Model Validation Demand Model Traffic Forecasts, Scheme Costs, and Economic Assessment. Further the overall BCR and all Sensitivity tests are described.

Appendix A contains the checklist of appraisal and modelling supporting material with indications of any changes since the Programme Entry MSBC in 2008.


3


Additional traffic data were collected to aid validation of the 2010 traffic model. This is reported in detail in the Traffic Survey Report.

Following the opening of the interim East Hill junction layout, which included signalising of the junction, Cornwall Council instructed SkyHigh Traffic Surveys to undertake classified traffic counts and queue length surveys at East Hill junction in February 2010. A weekday count took place on Tuesday, 9th February 2010 and a weekend peak count on Saturday, 6th February 2010. The queue length surveys included immediate junctions beyond East Hill to observe the total queue length at 5 minute intervals.

For the weekday the records were kept 7am to 7pm and for the weekend only the hours from 10am to 3pm were surveyed.

Additionally Cornwall Council provided directional ATC traffic flow data at Barncoose Terrace and Barncoose Link for 2009 and until May 2010.

From the TRADS database, 2010 ATC traffic data were available for three different locations along the A30 within the model area. The light and heavy vehicle split was taken from the classified data available on TRADS. Vehicles with a length over 6.6m were considered as heavy vehicles.

Additional journey time surveys were undertaken during March 2010 as significant changes were made to the highway network since the 2005 validation. The new journey time surveys were carried out for two routes through the study area. For both routes timings were collected in two directions and recorded over two days for AM, Interpeak and PM peak. Route 1 starts at Blowinghouse Hill Roundabout and leads along the A3047 to Wesley Street in Camborne. Route 2 also starts at Blowinghouse Hill Roundabout but leads along the Barncoose Link, Wilson Way and Dudnance Lane to Tolvaddon Energy Park north of the A30. The routes covered all entries to the key junction at East Hill, and routes used by traffic which could transfer to a new East-West Link.

2. Traffic Surveys


4


The CPR model validation was updated in 2010 after the implementation of the East Hill interim scheme junction layout including the signalisation of the junction. The full validation process for the 2010 model is described in the Assignment Model Validation Report.

3.1 Highway Network Updates

Updating the model to 2010 included adding Barncoose link, which opened in 2007, and updating East Hill junction from a double mini-roundabout to a signalised junction. This was completed in January 2010.

3.2 Public Transport Network Updates

The VISUM public transport model was updated in line with the 2010 bus and rail timetables.

3.3 Generalised Cost Parameters

The generalised cost parameters for each vehicle type determine the cost of a journey based on time, PPM (pence per minute) and distance, PPK (pence per km). These have been updated in the model to comply with WebTAG values in Unit 3.5.6 of April 2011.

3.4 2010 Matrix Building

2010 matrices have been built based on the housing and commercial completions undertaken between 2006 and March 2010. Matrices were set out into 5 user classes namely Car & LGV Commuting, Car Employers Business, Car & LGV Other, LGV Business, HGV.

LGV and HGV traffic growth from 2006 to 2010 has been calculated using NTM2009 for the South West region.

The through trips along the A30 were growthed up based on TEMPRO v6.2 growth factors for Cornwall.

Bus matrices for 2010 were updated based on TEMPRO v6.2. Matrices remained divided

3.5 2010 Validation

Validation for the 2010 SATURN model was undertaken at 6 locations for which independent data was available. Existing and forecast delays at the East Hill junction are critical to determining the need for new transport infrastructure to support regeneration, and to estimate scheme dependent development. In order to ensure that the model provides a good representation of traffic at East Hill, the model was calibrated to represent existing turning movements using a matrix estimation procedure.

3. Assignment Model Validation


5


4. Demand Model Realism testing was undertaken based on the validated 2010 model. This is described in detail in the Demand Model Report.

The DIADEM assessments were set up to model the following demand responses:

Frequency (for sensitivity test only)

Mode Choice

Re-distribution

As bus demand matrices are specified in passengers, vehicle occupancy factors have been calculated for the highway demand matrices.

The initial DIADEM parameters were based on the median parameters provided in guidance in WebTAG unit 3.10.3. These were adjusted to parameters that achieved fuel cost elasticities within the range as recommended in WebTAG for employers business and all day.

A second set of parameters, for which the lambda values are outside the recommended range were defined. These achieved elasticities within the WebTAG recommended range for all purposes and were used for a sensitivity test during the economic assessments.

The recommended journey time elasticity according to WebTAG 3.10.4 is to be less than -2. This was achieved for both sets of DIADEM parameters.


6


The details of highway and public transport forecasts are described in the Forecasting Report.

5.1 Forecast Years

The Scheme is now expected to open in 2015. Forecasts have been prepared for 2015 and 2030.

5.2 Forecast Networks

The Do Minimum networks include the latest layout of the East Hill signal junction after further capacity improvements were made after March 2010 (the basis of the validation model). Further improvements are planned at the A30 junctions in Camborne, Pool and Redruth. The junction at Druid’s Road/Wilson Way will become signalised as well as the access to the Tuckingmill Development. Also the Dolcoath Development Link is anticipated to be built regardless of the proposed East-West link.

The East-West link proposed as part of the Transport Package connects at the Dolcoath Development Link, leads to the Tuckingmill development, to which it will be connected via the Tuckingmill Urban Village link and joins at Dudnance Lane at the Heartlands junction. A further new road section is proposed from the southern end of Dudnance Lane to Wilson Way. No changes are assumed for the forecast public transport networks.

5.3 Forecast Matrices

5.3.1 Highway matrices

The 2015 matrices were based on the development schedule provided by Cornwall Council. In order to identify scheme dependent developments, matrices for several forecast years were built to identify at which year the additional traffic levels in the Do Minimum resulted in an unacceptable level of service. As delays at East Hill junction were modelled as an average of 7 minutes delay per vehicle 2015, all local development after 2015 was assumed to be scheme dependent.

The 2015 reference matrices include all forecast trip generated by proposed developments that were identified as ‘near certain’ or ‘more than likely’ in the uncertainty log, and the growth controlled to Tempro v6.2.

Forecast matrices for 2030 were based on the population forecasts in the proposed Core Strategy for Cornwall, as set out in the draft Camborne, Pool, Illogan & Redruth Framework, and the forecast of jobs which follows from the Tempro v6.2 relationships between households, working age population and jobs. The alternative assumptions are based on the proposed Core Strategy values. The Core Strategy is consistent with Tempro v6.2 at a Cornwall County level.

.

5. Traffic Forecasts


7


5.3.2 Public Transport Matrices

Forecast matrices for public transport were based on TEMPRO 6.2 growth separately for ‘car available’ and ‘no car available’.

5.3.3 Demand Model Set-up

The forecasts use DIADEM to undertake variable demand modelling using the final parameters calculated following realism testing on the 2010 validated model.

5.3.4 Sensitivity Tests

Tempro v6.2 forecasts lower numbers of population and jobs in the Camborne/Redruth area than the proposed Cornwall Core Strategy. A sensitivity test was therefore carried out applying Tempro v6.2 factors for the average of former Carrick and Kerrier Districts to the core development matrix for 2015. TEMPRO version 6.2 factors were extracted for commuting, employers business and other purposes.

Goods vehicle matrices and public transport matrices have not been amended for this sensitivity test.

Further sensitivity tests have been carried out on traffic growth and variable demand parameters.


8


6.1 Current Scheme Costs

The costs as provided by Cornwall Council are shown in the table below.

Table 6.1: Scheme Costs

Item 2011/ 2012

2012/ 2013

2013/ 2014

2014/ 2015

Total - BAFFB

Construction Costs:

Preferred first stage construction - Cost Estimate [2011 Prices] as per Carillion priced BQ's incl Acc Wks

0.90 5.07 6.07 12.04

Dudnance Lane & Wilson Way - Inlay of surfacing 0.46 0.36 0.82

Statutory Undertakers' equipment diversion costs 0.78 0.33 1.11

A3047 Public Transport corridor improvements 0.00

Tuckingmill Link [TUV] to A3047 0.00 0.00 0.00

Risks & Opportunities 1.69 1.13 2.82

Construction Inflation factor (@ 5.8%) 1.00 1.06 1.12 1.18 2.46

Outturn construction costs (1) 0.00 0.95 8.95 9.34 19.25

Land Costs:

Dec 2010 Cost estimate 1.00 1.21 1.00 3.21

General Inflation factor (@ 2.5%) 1.03 1.05 1.08 1.10

Additional local land cost adjustment factor (@ 2%) 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 0.46

Outturn land costs (2) 0.00 1.09 1.38 1.19 3.67

Other Costs:

Preparation and Supervision 0.64 0.78 0.30 0.24 1.97

Strategic and Commercial Risks and Opportunities 0.00

Sub-Total (Other costs) 0.64 0.78 0.30 0.24 1.97

General inflation factor (@ 2.5 %) from 2013/2014 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.05 0.02

Outturn other costs (3) 0.64 0.78 0.30 0.25 1.98

Total Outturn Scheme Costs (4) = (1)+(2)+(3) 0.64 2.83 10.64 10.79 24.90

Grant, Developer & Local Authority Contribution:

Convergence Funding [ERDF] 0.12 1.44 2.00 1.00 4.56

RDA Funding 0.00

Growth Point Funding 0.37 0.50 0.87

TUV Developer Contribution 0.00

Developer Contribution (roof tax) 0.35 1.63 1.98

Local Authority Contribution 0.15 0.32 0.51 0.43 1.41

Outturn Contribution (5) 0.64 2.26 2.86 3.06 8.82

Source: Cornwall Council

6. Scheme Cost Changes


9


6.2 Changes to Scheme Costs since Programme Entry

At programme entry in 2008 the estimated scheme costs accumulated to £46m with a DfT contribution of £38m. This is now reduced by more than half to £16m. Also the third party contributions have increased by almost 100%.

Table 6.2: Changes in Scheme Costs

Cost Type At Programme Entry Now Difference

Total Scheme Costs £46.17m £24.90 -£21.27m

DfT Contribution £37.72m £16.08 -£21.64m

Local Authority Contribution £4.21m £1.41 -£2.8m

Third Party Contribution £4.24m £7.41 +£3.17m

Source: Cornwall Council


10


The details of the economic assessments are described in the Economic Assessment Report.

7.1 TUBA assessments

As a consequence of the new traffic forecasts, matrix inputs to TUBA have been taken from the proposed Core Strategy forecast assignments. Assessments have been run using TUBA 1.8.

Benefit proportions by sector have been included in the reporting.

Annualisation factors have been calculated for overnight and weekend hours and benefits for these periods included. Flows for these periods have been based on appropriate factors of the interpeak flows.

Scheme costs within the TUBAs have been updated in line with the latest scheme cost estimate provided by Cornwall Council. Optimism bias has been set at 10%.

7.2 COBA assessments

Although no new COBA assessment was undertaken the Transport Economic Efficiency Assessment submitted as part of the MSBC document issued in November 2008 showed accident benefits of £0.6 million for the preferred option case.

Accident benefits are likely to occur as a result of a reduction in vehicle kilometres, and/or a transfer of traffic from roads with a high accident rate to higher standard routes. We have reviewed the change in vehicle-kilometres as a result of completion of the East-West Link, and this shows a small reduction of less than 1%. Traffic using the new high standard East-West Link is likely to have transferred from lower standard routes. Accident benefits are likely to remain low.

7.3 Other economic assessments

7.3.1 Reliability

Guidance described in WebTAG unit 3.5.7 was followed in order to assess the benefits through improved reliability. The calculation includes private and goods vehicle journey time reliability and the urban road variability formulae were applied. A total of £3.7m benefits were calculated for the assessment period.

7.3.2 Wider Impacts

Only the output change in imperfectly competitive markets has been assessed to take account of the impact of reduced transport costs on increased production or output. In line with WebTAG unit 3.5.14 section 3 these benefits are estimated as a fixed 10% proportion of the total user benefits to the business journeys. This amounts to £1.2m.

7. Economic Assessment


11


7.3.3 Scheme Dependent Development Benefits

In order to estimate the benefits from housing and employment the guidance described in WebTAG unit 3.16 was followed. This was undertaken for housing and employment considered as dependent only. This includes only developments after 2015 and also depends on the volume of additional traffic forecast by the development and on the location in relation to the scheme. Transport external costs were also taken into consideration. Adding all the wider economic benefits for jobs, housing and the transport external costs benefits of £25m can be achieved between 2016 and 2030.


12


Overall scheme benefits including reliability and wider economic impact benefits are calculated with a BCR of 3.27. This does not include the dependent housing and employment benefits.

Table 8.1: Tuba Benefits Core Strategy with OP and Reliability

In line with DfT requirements for BAFFB submissions an economic assessment was undertaken for the NTEM v6.2 Central Case traffic forecasts. The results of this assessment, without the inclusion of reliability and wider economic impacts, is shown below.

Table 8.2: Tuba Benefits Compared for Core Strategy and Central Case

8. Overall Scheme Benefit Cost Ratio

Benefits/Disbenefits/Costs Core Strategy with OP £000’s

Greenhouse Gases 824

Reliability Benefits 3,646

Wider Impacts Benefits 1,233

Economic Efficiency: Consumer User – Commuting 6,796

Economic Efficiency: Consumer User – Other 12,727

Economic Efficiency: Business Users and Providers 12,327

Wider Public Finances (Indirect Taxation Revenues) -2,003

Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 35,549

Present Value of Costs (PVC) 10,860

Net Present Value (NPV) 24,689

Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 3.27

Benefits/Disbenefits/Costs Core Strategy with Off Peak £000’s

NTEM v6.2 Central Case with Off Peak

£000’s

Greenhouse Gases 824 635

Economic Efficiency: Consumer User – Commuting 6,796 5,494

Economic Efficiency: Consumer User – Other 12,727 10,318

Economic Efficiency: Business Users and Providers 12,327 9,996

Wider Public Finances (Indirect Taxation Revenues) -2,003 -1,601

Present Value of Benefits (PVB) 30,671 24,842

Present Value of Costs (PVC) 10,860 10,860

Net Present Value (NPV) 19,811 13,982

Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) 2.82 2.29


13


In line with WebTAG requirements further sensitivity tests were undertaken as follows: High Growth Test: This was undertaken based on the NTEM v6.2 central case matrices. To the 2015

highway reference matrices an extra 5.59% of the base matrices was added and the 2030 high growth highway matrices were increased by an extra 11.18% of the base matrices. For the bus reference matrices the 2015 had 2.25% of the base added and 2030 was increased by 6.71%. With this sensitivity test the benefits of the scheme increase by 19%.

Low Growth Test: Similarly to the high growth test a low growth assumption test was undertaken in line

with WebTag. This included building matrices with a reduction of trips by the same proportions of the base matrix as was added for the high growth. This was also applied to the NTEM v6.2 central case reference matrices. With this sensitivity test the overall benefits reduce by 20%.

DIADEM Lambda Parameter Test: A sensitivity test was undertaken to identify the variability of the

economic results based on Lambda parameters 50% greater than those in the NTEM v6.2 central case. This is in line with WebTAG unit 3.10.4 section 1.8.4. With this sensitivity test the present value benefits reduce by less than 1%.

DIADEM Alternative Parameter Test: The realism test described in the Demand Model Report

concluded that a sensitivity test should be undertaken with DIADEM parameters that achieved all fuel cost elasticities within the required WebTAG range for each user class and timer period as well as for all day. These included a frequency response for commuting and employers business and a lambda value for car other outside the WebTAG recommended range. This sensitivity test results in a present value benefit increase of 1%.

9. Sensitivity Tests


14


The updated economic assessments based on the 2010 validated models and the Cornwall Core Strategy forecast forecasts a cost benefit (BCR) ratio of 2.8. This represents high value for money. A sensitivity with lower development from local TEMPRO v6.2 growth controls results in a lower BCR of 2.3 but still represents high value for money.

Additionally the reliability benefits and an element of the wider economic benefits likely to arise from the scheme implementation were considered adding 16% to the scheme benefits resulting in a BCR of 3.3. It can therefore be concluded that the scheme offers high value for money. Taking into account external costs an additional £25m benefits can be achieved by 2030 if regeneration can proceed as set out by Cornwall Council and the Urban Regeneration Company.

10. Summary


15


Appendix A. Checklist of appraisal and modelling supporting material _____________________________________ 2

Appendices


16


Cost Benefit Analysis Item Section/Page Updates since 2008 A clear explanation of the underlying assumptions used in the Cost Benefit Analysis. Information on local factors used. For example the derivation of growth factors, M factors in COBA and annualisation factors in TUBA (to include full details of any calculations). A diagram of the network (if COBA used). Information on the number of junctions modelled (if COBA used), for both the do-minimum and the do-something. Details of assumptions about operating costs and commercial viability (e.g. public transport, park and ride, etc.). Full appraisal inputs/outputs (when used, COBA and/or TUBA input and output files should be supplied). Evidence that TUBA/COBA warning messages have been checked and found to be acceptable Spatial (sectoral) analysis of TEE benefits Details of the maintenance delay costs/savings. Details of the delays during construction.

Economic Assessment Report August 2011

Traffic forecasts have been updated which has meant updated inputs to TUBA and dependent development calculations. TUBA benefits calculated for overnight and weekend hours. Sectoral analysis of benefits included. Scheme costs updated to reflect latest estimate within report and TUBA assessment Benefits calculated for reliability and wider impacts calculated in accordance with WebTAG Various sensitivity test undertaken in line with WebTAG requirements for high growth, low growth, two sets of DIADEM parameters, Matrix estimation and HGV adjustments.

Economic Case Assessment Item Section/Page Assessment of Environmental impacts, to include an environmental constraints map.

Assessment of Safety impacts and the assumed accident rates presented (COBA output should be provided if an accident only COBA has been run).

Assessment of Economic impacts. Economic Assessment Report August 2011

Assessment of Accessibility impacts. Assessment of Integration impacts. A comprehensive Appraisal Summary Table. Worksheet provided. AST worksheets. Worksheets provided

for Core Strategy, Central Case and all sensitivity tests.

Appendix A. Checklist of appraisal and modelling supporting material


17


Modelling Item Section/Page Updates since

2008 An Existing Data and Traffic Surveys Report to include:

Details of the sources, locations (illustrated on a map), methods of collection, dates, days of week, durations, sample factors, estimation of accuracy, etc. Details of any specialist surveys (e.g. stated preference). Traffic and passenger flows; including daily, hourly and seasonal profiles, including details by vehicle class where appropriate. Journey times by mode, including variability if appropriate. Details of the pattern and scale of traffic delays and queues. Desire line diagrams for important parts of the network.

Diagrams of existing traffic flows, both in the immediate corridor and other relevant corridors.

Traffic Survey Report August 2011

2010 survey data added taking account of network changes.

An Assignment Model Validation Report to include: Description of the road traffic and public transport passenger assignment model development, including model network and zone plans, details of treatment of congestion on the road system and crowding on the public transport system. Description of the data used in model building and validation with a clear distinction made for any independent validation data. Evidence of the validity of the networks employed, including range checks, link length checks, and route choice evidence. Details of the segmentation used, including the rationale for that chosen. Validation of the trip matrices, including estimation of measurement and sample errors. Details of any 'matrix estimation' techniques used and evidence of the effect of the estimation process on the scale and pattern of the base travel matrices. Validation of the trip assignment, including comparisons of flows (on links and across screenlines/cordons) and, for road traffic models, turning movements at key junctions. Journey time validation, including, for road traffic models, checks on queue pattern and magnitudes of delays/queues. Detail of the assignment convergence. Present year validation if the model is more than 5 years old.

A diagram of modelled traffic flows, both in the immediate corridor and other relevant corridors.

Assignment Model Validation Report August 2011

2010 Validation added Generalised cost calculation included.

A Demand Model Report to include: Where no Variable Demand Model has been developed evidence should be provided to support this decision (e.g. follow guidance in WebTAG Unit 3.10.1 Variable Demand Modelling - Preliminary Assessment Procedures). Description of the demand model. Description of the data used in the model building and validation.

Details of the segmentation used, including the rationale for that chosen. This should include justification for any segments remaining fixed.

Demand Model Report August 2011

Realism testing carried out 2010 validation DIADEM parameters achieved within WebTAG guidance.


18


Evidence of model calibration and validation and details of any sensitivity tests. Details of any imported model components and rationale for their use. Validation of the supply model sensitivity in cases where the detailed assignment models do not iterate directly with the demand model. Details of the realism testing, including outturn elasticities of demand with respect to fuel cost and public transport fares. Details of the demand/supply convergence.

Second set of parameters outside WebTAG range set up for sensitivity test which result in elasticities more in line with WebTAG requirements.

A Forecasting Report to include: Description of the methods used in forecasting future traffic demand. Description of the future year demand assumptions (e.g. land use and economic growth - for the do minimum, core and variant scenarios). An uncertainty log providing a clear description of the planning status of local developments Description of the future year transport supply assumptions (i.e. networks examined for the do minimum, core scenario and variant scenarios). Description of the travel cost assumptions (e.g. fuel costs, PT fares, parking). Comparison of the local forecast results to national forecasts, at an overall and sectoral level. Presentation of the forecast travel demand and conditions for the core scenario and variant scenarios including a diagram of forecast flows for the do-minimum and the scheme options for affected corridors. If the model includes very slow speeds or high junction delays evidence of their plausibility. An explanation of any forecasts of flows above capacity, especially for the do-minimum, and an explanation of how these are accounted for in the modelling/appraisal.

Presentation of the sensitivity tests carried out (to include high and low demand tests).

Forecasting Report August 2011

Traffic forecasts now calculated using latest local core housing and employment information for 2015. Uncertainty logs included Core Strategy and NTEM v6.2 Central Case 2030 matrices built. Low and high growth sensitivities undertaken in accordance with WebTAG Flows for 4 further sensitivity tests reported.

Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding...Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding Bid...

Documents

Transcript of Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding...Camborne Pool Redruth - Best and Final Funding Bid...