Bedminster Green Framework Area...Bedminster area defined by ‘Draft Policy DS8: Central Bedminster which confirms: “Central Bedminster is proposed as an area of growth and regeneration

On behalf of BGFA Consortium

Project Ref: 41030 | Rev: 2 | Date: February 2020

Registered Office: Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park, London Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1JU Office Address: 10 Queen Square, Bristol, BS1 4NT T: +44 (0)117 332 7840 E: [email protected]

Bedminster Green Framework Area

Stage 2 Transport Assessment

Stage 2 Transport Assessment Bedminster Green Framework Area

\\Bri-vfps-001.pba.int\bri\Projects\41030 Bedminster Green\Technical\Transport\WP\Reports\Stage 2 TA\41030 Stage 2 Transport Assessment_200227_Final_FOR_ISSUE.docx

ii

Document Control Sheet Project Name: Bedminster Green Framework Area Project Ref: 41030 Report Title: Stage 2 Transport Assessment Doc Ref: 2 Date: February 2020

Name Position Signature Date

Prepared by: K. Stock Principal Transport Planner

February 2020

Reviewed by: P. Rawlins Associate

February 2020

Approved by: M. Whiston Director

February 2020

For and on behalf of Stantec UK Limited

Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved

- Jan 2020 Draft for Comment KS PR MW

1 19 Feb 2020 Final Draft for Comment JH PR MW

2 27 Feb 2020 Final KS PR MW

This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Limited (‘Stantec’) on behalf of its client to whom this report is addressed (‘Client’) in connection with the project described in this report and takes into account the Client's particular instructions and requirements. This report was prepared in accordance with the professional services appointment under which Stantec was appointed by its Client. This report is not intended for and should not be relied on by any third party (i.e. parties other than the Client). Stantec accepts no duty or responsibility (including in negligence) to any party other than the Client and disclaims all liability of any nature whatsoever to any such party in respect of this report.



iii

Contents

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

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

1.2 Policy Background ......................................................................................................... 2

2 Public Transport Strategy .......................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Existing Bus Network..................................................................................................... 3

2.3 A38 Bus Lanes .............................................................................................................. 4

2.4 Bus Stops ...................................................................................................................... 5

2.5 Bedminster Station Access ........................................................................................... 6

3 Walking and Cycling Strategy .................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Walking Strategy ........................................................................................................... 8

3.3 Cycling Strategy ............................................................................................................ 9

4 Whitehouse Lane Improvements ............................................................................................. 11

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 11

4.2 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 11

4.3 Existing Traffic Flow and Pattern ................................................................................. 13

4.4 Options for Whitehouse Lane Traffic Management / Closure (Qualitative Analysis) .. 15

4.5 Options for Philip Street .............................................................................................. 18

4.6 Options for Whitehouse Lane – Potential Changes to Traffic Flows at Hereford Street/A38 Malago Road Junction ............................................................................................ 19

4.7 Impact of Option B and C on Development Trip Distribution ...................................... 25

4.8 Junction Capacity Analysis .......................................................................................... 28

4.9 Proposed Improvements to Cycle Facilities ................................................................ 30

5 Vehicular Access and Parking Strategy ................................................................................. 32

5.1 Plot Access .................................................................................................................. 32

5.2 Parking Strategy .......................................................................................................... 32

6 Outline Travel Plan .................................................................................................................... 35

6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 35

6.2 Potential Travel Plan Measures .................................................................................. 35

6.3 Travel Plan Coordinator Role ...................................................................................... 36

6.4 Implementation, Targets and Monitoring ..................................................................... 36

7 Summary and Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 38

Figures

Figure 2-1 – Public Transport Strategy Figure 3-1 – Walking and cycling strategy Figure 4-1 – ANPR Survey – Location of Cameras Figure 4-2 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – AM Peak Southbound



iv

Figure 4-3 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – AM Peak Northbound Figure 4-4 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – PM Peak Southbound Figure 4-5 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – PM Peak Northbound Figure 4-6 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – 12 Hour Southbound Figure 4-7 – Whitehouse Lane Through Movements – 12 Hour Northbound Figure 4-8 – Surveyed Traffic Flows Figure 4-9 – 2018 Base Traffic Flows Figure 4-10 – 2031 Base Traffic Flows Existing Arrangement Figure 4-11 – 2018 Redistributed Base Traffic – Option B Figure 4-12 – 2018 Redistributed Base Traffic – Option C Figure 4-13 – 2031 Redistributed Base Traffic – Option B Figure 4-14 – 2031 Redistributed Base Traffic – Option C Figure 4-15 – Development Traffic – Existing Arrangement Figure 4-16 – Redistributed Development Traffic - Option B Figure 4-17 – Redistributed Development Traffic - Option C Figure 4-18 – 2031 Base + Development Traffic – Existing Arrangement Figure 4-19 – 2031 Base + Development Traffic - Option B Figure 4-20 - 2031 Base + Development Traffic - Option C Figure 5-1 – Bedminster East Residents Parking Scheme and walking distances

Tables

Table 4-1: Through trips on Whitehouse Lane ...................................................................................... 14 Table 4-2: Breakdown of Vehicle Type on Whitehouse Lane ............................................................... 15 Table 4-3: TEMPro growth factors ........................................................................................................ 20 Table 4-4: Option B Hereford St / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Ln Junction Traffic Flow Changes ........ 20 Table 4-5: Hereford St / Malago Rd Traffic Flow Changes following implementation of Option B ....... 22 Table 4-6: Option C Hereford St / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Ln Junction Traffic Flow Changes ........ 23 Table 4-7: Hereford St / Malago Rd Traffic Flow Changes following implementation of Option C ....... 24 Table 4-8: Development Vehicle Trip Generation ................................................................................. 25 Table 4-9: Traffic Distribution by Plot .................................................................................................... 26 Table 4-10: Development traffic distribution at Malago Road / Hereford Street junction ...................... 26 Table 4-11: Option B - redistributed development traffic ....................................................................... 27 Table 4-12: Option C - redistributed development traffic ...................................................................... 28 Table 4-13: Hereford Street / Malago Road Existing Arrangement - AM Peak .................................... 28 Table 4-14: Hereford Street / Malago Road Existing Arrangement - PM Peak ..................................... 29 Table 4-15: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option B Arrangement - AM Peak ................................... 29 Table 4-16: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option B Arrangement - PM Peak ................................... 29 Table 4-17: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option C Arrangement - AM Peak ................................... 29 Table 4-18: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option C Arrangement - PM Peak ................................... 30 Table 5-1: Private Parking Provision ..................................................................................................... 33

Appendices

Appendix A: TEMPro Output Reports

Appendix B: Junction Modelling Output Reports



v


1


1 Introduction 1.1 Background

1.1.1 Stantec has been commissioned by the Bedminster Green Framework Area (BGFA) Consortium to provide highway and transport advice in support of the proposed mixed-use redevelopment scheme at Bedminster Green, Bristol.

1.1.2 This document forms the Stage 2 Transport Assessment (TA) which should be read in conjunction with the Stage 1 TA (Stantec, February 2020) which sets out the context with regard to:

National and local policy;

Existing transport conditions;

The development proposals including the site access strategy; and

The development travel demand.

1.1.3 At Stage 1 it was concluded that to support development the following require further consideration:

A parking strategy for the site, with consideration to the low levels of parking proposed;

A walking and cycling strategy, including identifying transport opportunities and measures to enhance the multi-modal movement corridors along Whitehouse Lane and towards Gaol Ferry Bridge for pedestrians and cyclists;

A Public Transport strategy including consideration of the options for providing 2-way bus lanes on the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue; and

Set out the approach to the site-wide Travel Plan.

1.1.4 In response to the Stage 1 conclusions, this Stage 2 TA sets out the transport and movement strategy for the BGFA and provides the details of measures required to the support the development and accommodate the trips associated with the proposed uses in a sustainable way. The report includes the following:

Section 2: Public Transport Strategy,

Section 3: Walking and Cycling Strategy;

Section 4: Whitehouse Lane Improvements;

Section 5: Vehicular Access and Parking Strategy;

Section 6: Outline Travel Plan; and

Section 7: Summary and Conclusions.

1.1.5 It should be noted that Drawings 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A and 41030/5501/NB001 Rev A have been referenced within this report. These drawings have been shared with BCC, who are now taking these principles forward as part of its continuing liaison with local stakeholders. The drawings are excluded from this version of the report to allow this process to proceed without prejudice.


2


1.2 Policy Background

1.2.1 Section 2 of the Stage 1 TA sets out a full review of National and Local policies with regards to the BGFA site. A summary of the key local policies that have helped shape the BGFA movement strategy are provided below.

1.2.2 Bristol City Council’s Core Strategy (Policy BCS10) seeks to support improvements to the transport infrastructure to provide an integrated transport system. As part of this, the Policy puts forward a hierarchy of transport users that gives priority to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport.

1.2.3 The Site Allocations and Development Management Policies document (Policy DM23) sets out a range of requirements for transport and new development. This includes safe and adequate access to public transport with improvements to provision where necessary, other transport improvements where needed to accommodate development, pedestrian and cycling provision and appropriate parking integral to the design of the scheme.

1.2.4 The Bristol Local Plan Review (March 2019) confirms that Central Bedminster will play an integral part in delivering Bristol’s housing targets. The BGFA lies within the Central Bedminster area defined by ‘Draft Policy DS8: Central Bedminster which confirms:

“Central Bedminster is proposed as an area of growth and regeneration due to the area’s location close to Bristol City Centre and Bristol Temple Quarter and the presence of underused land which could support significant new development. The area is served by strategic public transport routes, including MetroBus services and Bedminster railway station. The area is also served by Windmill Hill City Farm, which offers opportunities and services to the local community and wider area.

There are a number of sites that are vacant or underused where it may be beneficial for a wider range of uses, including new homes, to be considered. The close proximity of many of these sites to one another suggests a potential focus for development of a more urban scale and form, guided by design criteria set out in the council’s supplementary planning document on Urban Living.”

“Sites within Central Bedminster will be developed for a mix of residential, workspace and community uses. Development will reinforce the Bedminster area as a mixed and inclusive community with a diversity of land uses providing opportunities to live, work, take leisure and access services.”

1.2.5 In relation to transport and access, the policy also states:

“Development will be supported by transport improvements which will include public transport enhancements, enhanced connectivity with surrounding areas, cycle provision, pedestrian route improvements and local highway improvements.”

1.2.6 This Stage 2 TA confirms that the BGFA site will prioritise pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users and provides appropriate measures to encourage travel by sustainable modes.


3


2 Public Transport Strategy 2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 The Draft Joint Local Transport Plan 4 (JLTP4) underwent consultation between February and March 2019. This set out the West of England’s proposals for a joint Bus Strategy which will seek to:

“provide realistic alternatives to private vehicle trips by continuing to improve local bus and rail networks, completing and expanding of the metrobus network, and improving routes to bus stops and stations for people cycling and walking.”

2.1.2 The Draft JLTP4 also sets out ambitions to:

“provide faster, more frequent, reliable and accessible services, combined with new and improved bus stations and other interchanges.”

2.1.3 For rail, the Draft JLTP4 confirms that:

“Stations will be brought up to a new high standard with improved passenger facilities and levels of accessibility, making them step free to enable all passengers to travel by train.”

2.1.4 ‘The Place to Be’ document, produced by the Urban Transport Group in January 2019 (summarised in the S1 TA), sets out the approach for the successful implementation of good public transport access at the heart of new developments. The document confirms that:

“transit-oriented development puts public transport front and centre, with the aim to maximise access by public transport, encourage walking and cycling, and minimise the need to own and use private cars”.

2.1.5 The Stage 1 TA sets out in more detail the seven key factors from this document which identified as facilitating successful transit-oriented development.

2.1.6 The BGFA will provide a comprehensive public transport strategy to support the delivery of the site, providing enhanced opportunities for travel by bus and rail for both existing and future residents. The BGFA public transport strategy is illustrated on Figure 2.1.

2.2 Existing Bus Network

2.2.1 The nearest existing bus stops to the site are situated on Dalby Avenue, East Street, Bedminster Parade and Catherine Mead Street. These stops are all within approximately 320m of the site and are served by 11 bus services including MetroBus. As the route runs through the BGFA, it will have a significant presence for new residents and provide an easy and highly accessible alternative to car use, given its dedicated infrastructure and resultant journey-time savings.

2.2.2 A dedicated bus lane is provided southbound on the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue, which starts opposite the junction of Stafford Street. There is a bus stop with a lay-by on the southbound side of the Dalby Avenue carriageway which has a modern shelter with timetable information, seating and a raised kerb.

2.2.3 The Stage 1 TA identifies that the majority (87.9%) of bus journeys are expected to be made between the site and Bristol City Centre, UWE and Cribbs Causeway. Under the existing situation, for inbound journeys, bus stops are located on Bedminster Parade or East Street. For outbound journeys, but stops are located on Dalby Avenue / Malago Road.


4


2.2.4 Bus services travelling inbound towards the City Centre travel east along East Street which is restricted to pedestrians only during the hours of 7am - 7pm, except for local buses and HGV loading (travelling eastbound only between the B3120 Cannon Street and Dalby Avenue). The remainder of East Street, to the east of Dalby Avenue and Bedminster Parade is a typical high street and has a northbound bus lane and a short section of southbound bus lane, recently constructed as part of the MetroBus improvements

2.2.5 A significant number of good quality bus services, including MetroBus, are provided from Bedminster Parade. The existing routes therefore provide good quality services for future residents to get to key destinations for employment, leisure and education purposes.

2.2.6 Whilst it is noted that there is no direct bus to Bristol Temple Meads or the Temple Quarter / Temple Quay area, these destinations are within an acceptable walk distance of BGFA and rail services from Bedminster station provide a reasonable alternative.

2.3 A38 Bus Lanes

2.3.1 The A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue, alongside East Street, forms part of a safeguarded transport link within BCC’s Site Allocations and Development Management Policies document. This route was safeguarded to allow for the construction of the Metrobus M1 Route, which has now been completed and opened in 2019.

2.3.2 As set out above, there is currently only an outbound bus lane on Malago Road / Dalby Avenue with inbound services utilising East Street and Bedminster Parade.

2.3.3 The BGFA Place-Making Framework identified Malago Road / Dalby Avenue as a strategic route that:

“is an important route that should form part of an integrated transport hub and the overall sense of place at Bedminster Green.”

2.3.4 And aims to provide:

“A high-quality public transport boulevard accommodating existing services and the new MetroBus route M1, to significantly enhance the link between the city centre, Bedminster and areas south to Hengrove Park, Bristol Airport and North Somerset.”

2.3.5 BCC propose that an inbound bus lane on the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue will be provided, which will be facilitated by the consortium as part of the development. The bus lane will begin just south of the junction with St Johns Road and will continue to a point around 80 metres south of East Street. In order to facilitate this, the existing outbound bus lane will be reduced in length. Drawings 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A and NB001 Rev A demonstrates that this can be provided within the existing highway boundary, land controlled by BCC, land controlled by Wessex Water (currently under negotiation) or within land controlled by the BGFA Consortium along Malago Road.

2.3.6 As part of the proposals, the existing toucan crossing between Little Paradise and Stafford Street will be relocated to the north by around 40 metres. Access to Church Lane and Little Paradise will be retained, however the junction with Stafford Street will be revised to allow the provision of a bus stop on the A38 to the south of the junction. This is set out in more detail in Section 2.4.

2.3.7 The provision of an inbound bus lane is likely to offer existing and future bus passengers reduced journey times for services towards the City Centre and more reliable services as a result of reallocating road space for buses.


5


2.3.8 The new bus lane would allow the rerouting of services that currently use the East Street corridor, which can experience constraints as a result of multi-vehicle use (i.e. HGV loading obstructions or blocking by stopped bus services). Alongside improved journey times for bus services as a result of having a dedicated lane towards the City Centre, this would also provide the opportunity for the public realm environment on East Street to be improved through the removal of buses on this route.

2.3.9 The BGFA will enable and support the reliability of buses through the provision of an inbound bus lane on Malago Road / Dalby Avenue through the centre of BGFA. This will help make the corridor more resilient to future growth, ensuring that public transport through the area is more effective.

2.3.10 Whilst BCC will implement the new bus lane, the BGFA Consortium will facilitate its delivery through the safeguarding of land and / or developer contributions towards the necessary infrastructure. The method / mechanism for securing funding is yet to be confirmed, however discussions to date indicate that this is likely to be through CIL contributions.

2.4 Bus Stops

2.4.1 Bus stops along the A38 corridor in the vicinity of BGFA have recently been upgraded as part of the M1 MetroBus route between Hengrove Park and Cribbs Causeway. These stops already provide improved passenger facilities including high quality shelters, timetable information and Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI).

2.4.2 As part of the BGFA proposals, the existing outbound bus stop lay-by on Dalby Avenue will be relocated, as shown on Drawings 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A and NB001 Rev A. The lay-by will be capable of accommodating three buses.

2.4.3 A new bus stop for inbound services will be provided on Dalby Avenue immediately north of Little Paradise, as shown on Drawings 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A and NB001 Rev A. The bus stop will be provided in a lay-by and will accommodate two buses.

2.4.4 In order to accommodate the bus stop in this location, the junction between Stafford Street and the A38 will be modified to ban vehicles turning into the road from the A38 and vehicles exiting on to the A38 in this location will only be permitted to turn right. The junction has been designed to prevent left turning vehicles through the provision of a build out to the north of the junction.

2.4.5 As set out in Section 5, Leicester Street will be extended westwards to connect to Little Paradise where two-way vehicular access to the A38 will be retained. In this way Little Paradise and Leicester Street will form the main vehicular access to Plots 2 and 4.

2.4.6 This bus stop has been designed and sited with consideration to existing constraints along the carriageway including:

Forward visibility to signal heads at pedestrian crossings;

The potential for a stationary bus to obstruct visibility to the signal heads;

Pedestrian desire lines and the need for crossings; and

Obstruction of express bus services if the bus stop was located within the bus lane.


6


2.4.7 The new bus stop will be located at the heart of BGFA and will be highly visible to future residents along the enhanced A38 corridor. The bus stop will be in close proximity to all of the individual plots, and closer than alternative stops on Bedminster Parade. The new bus stop will therefore improve accessibility to bus services for future residents and encourage travel by bus. The location of the new and improved bus stops will also provide those people transferring to and from rail services at Bedminster station with a convenient connection. The provision of a new bus stop will also maximise the opportunity for MetroBus to maintain its level of service by removing the potential for delay.

2.4.8 As with the new bus lane, the provision of this new bus stop will also provide the opportunity for BCC to reallocate the road space along East Street.

2.5 Bedminster Station Access

2.5.1 Development at BGFA provides the opportunity to explore options to improve Bedminster railway station.

2.5.2 The BGFA Framework confirms that access to the existing station is unappealing and that it is hidden from view. In discussion with Bristol City Council, Network Rail and the BGFA Consortium, options will be explored in terms of deliverability for improving and enhancing the existing Bedminster Station in order to provide closer connections to the MetroBus and local bus networks as well as East Street and Dalby Avenue.

2.5.3 A feasibility study on a number of options is being carried out for further consideration by BCC, Network Rail and the Consortium in order to facilitate the public realm and Station improvements, changes to Whitehouse Lane are being considered by BCC. This includes making Whitehouse Lane one-way for vehicles.

2.5.4 Station enhancements and public realm improvements would provide better visibility between the station, BGFA, the A38 and East Street, facilitating the desire lines identified in the BGFA Framework.

2.5.5 It is envisaged that the station improvements will encourage both future and existing residents to utilise the rail services more frequently as a viable and attractive alternative to the car.

2.5.6 As part of the station improvements, the developer will give consideration to providing appropriate secure, covered cycle parking in close proximity to the station entrance. The exact quantum, form and location of the cycle parking will be confirmed in due course as the masterplan progresses.

2.5.7 Bedminster Station is served by a moderate frequency of trains, particularly in the off-peak period when a broadly hourly service to key destinations is maintained. Peak frequencies are broadly two trains per hour but the service level in the evenings and on Sundays is lower. However, with the introduction of Metrowest phase 1, this will be improved. This, coupled with the improvements and enhancements to the urban realm environment plus the potential improvements and enhancements to the existing Bedminster Station, means the BGFA site should benefit from enhanced rail connections.


7


3 Walking and Cycling Strategy 3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 The intention of the BGFA is to create environments that reduces the need to travel by car and lessen the impacts of through traffic.

3.1.2 ‘The Place to Be’ document, prepared by the Urban Transport Group, suggests that the ‘Healthy Streets’ approach should be adopted for developments such as BGFA. This approach:

“prioritises walking and cycling, accessibility to public transport and good urban realm which makes people feel safe and relaxed, thus they can enjoy being in the space.”

3.1.3 The Place-Making Framework for the development identifies the Framework Principles for the development, including desire lines between the BGFA and key destinations. A strong and active route between Windmill Hill, Bedminster station and East Street will underpin the BGFA.

3.1.4 The principles of the walking and cycling strategy for BGFA is illustrated in Image 3.1 below, extracted from the Place-Making Framework.

Image 3.1 – Walking and Cycling Principles


8


3.2 Walking Strategy

Bedminster Green Framework Area Improvements

3.2.1 The development of the Bedminster Green area and improvements to the A38 and Whitehouse Lane affords the ability to provide enhanced connections in the local area to support development, including:

Widening / Improvements to footways on the A38 Corridor / Hereford Street and Whitehouse Lane including 3.0m footways along the A38 corridor and 2.0 – 3.0m footways on Hereford Street and Whitehouse. Side roads along the A38 and Whitehouse will have raised table crossings to prioritise pedestrian movement. Details of potential improvements to Whitehouse Lane are set out in Section 4 below;

Improved signalised crossings on the A38 corridor between St Catherine’s Place and The Green, between Stafford Street and Providence Place and in the vicinity of Hereford Street junction;

Improved crossing facilities on Whitehouse Lane by the junction with Windmill Hill, outside of the Station, to the east of Clarke Street, at the eastern edge of the Plot 3 boundary and 2 in the vicinity of the Philip Street junction;

A segregated route for pedestrians will be provided between East Street and Bedminster railway station, across Dalby Avenue and via St Catherine’s Place. Not only will this provide a direct link across the site, it will also create a visual connection towards the station from East Street. Additional links will be created via Stafford Street, Little Paradise Street and Church Lane. The approach aligns with the BGFA Framework which identifies that:

“A strong and active route between Windmill Hill, the station and East Street will underpin the quarter.”

An improved foot / cycleway will be provided across the green on the approximate route of the existing Providence Place path;

Improvements to Clarke Street will be made to provide a connection to Bedminster Parade and Bedminster Bridge;

A footway will be created around the river restoration works being undertaken on The Green; and

Improvements will be made along Stafford Street / Leicester Street and Little Paradise including the widening of footway facilities where appropriate and narrowing of the carriageway on Stafford Street.

3.2.2 It is envisaged that the above improvements will be secured through CIL, S106 contributions and / or planning conditions as part of the planning approvals process.

Wider Improvements

3.2.3 The Stage 1 TA identifies that the majority of walking trips from the site are expected to utilise two key desire lines, either via the A38 East Street and Bedminster Parade or Warden Road, Dean Lane and Gaol Ferry Bridge to the north of the proposed development towards Bristol City Centre and beyond.

3.2.4 The existing infrastructure on East Street and Bedminster Parade route, including footway widths and crossing opportunities is considered to be appropriate for the increase in pedestrian trips forecast as a result of the BGFA.


9


3.2.5 It is considered that the infrastructure between the development and Dean Lane is either appropriate for the increase in pedestrian trips forecast or will be upgraded as part of the BGFA improvements set out above.

3.2.6 BCC consider that facilities on Dean Lane between Warden Road and Coronation Road are substandard and the route has a poor safety record. On this basis they have identified the link as an area that requires improvement and have designed an improvement scheme for the link. It is therefore proposed that a contribution towards the improvement scheme is considered by the Consortium. It is noted, however, that due to the size of the Bedminster Green development, route choice from individual plots will vary and therefore justification for providing contributions towards this link will need to be applied on a plot by plot basis at the planning application stage to ensure that contributions sought meet the requirements of the NPPF and CIL123 tests. Any contribution will be secured by S106 Agreement and improvements will be delivered by BCC.

3.3 Cycling Strategy

Bedminster Green Framework Area Improvements

3.3.1 The development of the Bedminster Green area and improvements to the A38 and Whitehouse Lane affords the ability to provide enhanced connections in the local area, including:

Improvements to the Providence Place cycle route across The Green including improved crossing facilities on the A38 and Whitehouse Lane;

Improvements to cycle facilities along Stafford Street and Leicester Street to connect into the Malago Greenway Route; and

Secure, covered cycle parking will be provided across the development site in accordance with BCC’s current standards (at the time of writing, the minimum provision for cycle parking is set out in Appendix 2 of the Site Allocation and Development Management Policies (SADMP) document).

3.3.2 It is envisaged that the above improvements will be secured by CIL, through S106 contributions and / or through planning conditions as part of the planning approvals process. The contributions should be proportionate to the impact of the development.

Wider Area Improvements

3.3.3 As set out above BCC have identified Dean Lane between Warden Road and Coronation Road to be sub-standard with a poor safety record. On this basis the Consortium will consider a reasonable financial contribution towards walk and cycle improvements along Dean Lane between Warden Road and Coronation Road. It is noted, however, that due to the size of the Bedminster Green development, route choice from individual plots will vary and therefore justification for providing contributions towards this link will need to be applied on a plot by plot basis at the planning application stage to ensure that contributions sought meet the requirements of the NPPF and CIL123 tests. Any contribution will be secured by S106 Agreement and improvements will be delivered by BCC.

3.3.4 The Stage 1 TA identifies that the majority of cycling trips from the site are expected to utilise Bedminster Parade and Whitehouse Lane to the north of the proposed development towards Bristol City Centre and beyond.


10


3.3.5 Whilst cyclists are able to use the existing bus lanes on Bedminster Parade, it is not considered an appropriate or attractive route for high numbers of cyclists and there are limited opportunities to deliver high quality infrastructure due to existing constraints. As a result, Whitehouse Lane has been identified as an alternative route for cyclists which could provide segregated facilities between BGFA and York Road.

3.3.6 An existing segregated cycle route is provided on the eastern side of Whitehouse Street between Windmill Close and York Road, with onward connections across Bedminster Bridge to Redcliffe Hill and Clarence Road. As part of the cycling strategy for BGFA, it is proposed to extend this cycle connection towards Bedminster station and the junction with Windmill Hill. The options to facilitate this are considered further in Chapter 4. It is anticipated that future schemes will provide additional improvement to the cycle route beyond Whitehouse Street in the future.


11


4 Whitehouse Lane Improvements 4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 As set out in previous sections the BGFA Consortium are considering amendments to Whitehouse Lane in conjunction with BCC in order to facilitate the potential future delivery of a new station entrance for Bedminster Station and to provide an improved cycle route to the City Centre from the development area. At the current time Bedminster Station is accessed via a subway to the southern side of the railway line.

4.1.2 As part of the proposals it is considered that reducing the traffic flow on Whitehouse Lane would provide significant benefits to the new public realm in front of the station building which is likely to increase footfall and the rail patronage in this location and will allow for the provision of a segregated cycle lane along Whitehouse Lane, connecting in with the existing route along Whitehouse Street.

4.1.3 As part of this, the following options for amending the treatment of Whitehouse Lane have been considered:

Option A - Closing it entirely in front of the proposed station building;

Option B - Making it one-way southbound between Philip Street and Windmill Hill; and

Option C - Making it one-way northbound between Philip Street and Windmill Hill.

4.1.4 This Section provides analysis of the options in terms of pros and cons of undertaking changes to Whitehouse Lane and provides analysis of the changes in traffic flows likely to come about as a result of the changes.

4.2 Existing Conditions

Existing Characteristics

4.2.1 Whitehouse Lane is a single carriageway road, running parallel to the railway track. To the north, the road leads to an industrial estate, and connects to ‘Whitehouse Street’ and to the south it connects to Hereford Street which continues before forming a priority T-junction with the A38 Malago Road. At the Hereford Street junction, the road forms a priority T-junction with Windmill Hill which provides access to the residential area to the south east and the existing Bedminster Station access.

4.2.2 A mix of small industrial units and residential units abuts the road frontage. The road provides on-street parking provision for the residential properties along its frontage and is also used for loading / unloading related to existing small industrial units. The road sits within the Bedminster East Residents Parking Zone and therefore has double yellow lines whilst providing intermittent on-street parking on both sides of the carriageway.

Bedminster Green Access and Frontage

4.2.3 Bedminster Railway Station is located adjacent to the BGFA development area and is within 450m of the entire site. The station is currently accessed via a short footpath and pedestrian subway at the junction of Fraser Street / Windmill Hill.


12


Provision for Pedestrians and Cyclists

4.2.4 Whitehouse Lane is subject to a speed of 20mph and has continuous footways on both sides of the carriageway. The footways are paved and lit, although their width is narrow at approximately 1.4m.

4.2.5 In terms of cycling infrastructure, the provision is limited to on-road with motorised traffic for the majority of the length of Whitehouse Lane. However, at the northern end of the road, at the junction with Windmill Close, a segregated cycle route is provided on the southern side of the carriageway that extends along Whitehouse Street to the A370 York Road (See Photo 2). This route forms part of the Filwood Greenway that connects south Bristol to the City Centre, through a series of off-road foot / cycleways and paths.

Photo 2: Two-way Cycleway along Whitehouse Street

4.2.6 Whitehouse Lane also provides a connection between the Malago Greenway and the Filwood Greenway and is designated as ‘quiet road’ in Bristol City Cycle map. The Malago Greenway is a largely off-road foot / cycle path connecting Bishport Avenue in Bishopsworth to the A370 in Southville. The Malago Greenway passes through the south of the proposed development, from Little Paradise to Whitehouse Lane.

Site Visit Observations

4.2.7 A site visit was carried out on 8th March 2019 to understand and assess the level of infrastructure and existing traffic movements on the road.

4.2.8 The site visit identified that:

The many conflicting traffic movements that occur, for example HGVs turning out of service areas and parking, lead to traffic congestion along the link;

Unauthorised parking of cars and heavy vehicles on double yellow lines has been observed at various points along the road (see Photo 6);

Footways are not maintained to a high standard;

The narrow footways are often found to be encroached with parked cars and residential refuse bins (see Photos 3 and 4); and


13


Cyclists were observed to use the road which reaffirms the role that this road plays as part of a cycling route connecting to the existing cycling infrastructure and network in the surroundings.

4.2.9 In summary the frontage of small industrial units, car wash and other support services provide a poor ambience to walk / cycle. Overall, public realm of this road is of poor quality, due to encroached footways, unauthorized parking and traffic congestion.

4.3 Existing Traffic Flow and Pattern

4.3.1 An Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) survey was undertaken on behalf of the BGFA Consortium on Wednesday 5th December 2018 for 12 hours (07:00 – 19:00). The map showing survey location points is attached in Figure 4-1.

4.3.2 Vehicle registration numbers are recorded by the cameras and by undertaking surveys at various points, vehicle movements can be tracked to derive origin destination data.

4.3.3 The results of the survey, showing the origin and destinations for trips using Whitehouse Lane in the AM and PM peak hours as well as over a 12-hour day are shown in Figures 4-2 – 4-7 The survey indicated 544 and 394 two-way vehicle movements on Whitehouse Lane, during the AM and PM peak hour respectively and 4,199 two-way movements during a 12-hour day.

Photo 5: On-street parking along Whitehouse Lane

Photo 6: Unauthorised parking of HGVs

Photo 3: Footways encroached by parked cars Photo 4: Residential frontage along Whitehouse Lane


14


Through Movements on Whitehouse Lane

4.3.4 As Figures 4-2 – 4-7 demonstrate, Whitehouse Lane is often used as a through route, both with trips from the A370 York Road through to the A38 Malago Road and trips from the A370 York Road through to St Johns Lane via Windmill Hill. The trips using this link as a through route are summarised in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Through trips on Whitehouse Lane

AMAM PM 12-hour

NENE SW Total NE SWSW Total NENE SW Total

Total Flow on Whitehouse Ln Flow 406 138 544 142 252 394 2311 1888 4199

Through traffic: A38 – A370

Flow 125 42 167 42 55 97 781 685 1466

% 30.8% 30.4% 30.7% 29.6% 21.8% 24.6% 33.8% 36.3% 34.9%

Through traffic: St Johns lane –

A370

Flow 35 4 39 7 0 7 138 8 146

% 8.6% 2.9% 7.2% 4.9% 0.0% 1.8% 6.0% 0.4% 3.5%

Total through traffic

Flow 160 46 206 49 55 104 919 693 1612

% 39.4% 33.3% 37.9% 34.5% 21.8% 26.4% 39.8% 36.7% 38.4%

Through traffic: St Johns Ln -

Whitehouse Ln Industrial Area

Flow 58 0 58 3 3 6 150 4 154

% 14.3% 0.0% 10.7% 2.1% 1.2% 1.5% 6.5% 0.2% 3.7%

Total though traffic - inc traffic through Windmill

Hill to Whitehouse Ln Industrial Area

Flow 218 46 264 52 58 110 1069 697 1766

% 53.7% 33.3% 48.5% 36.6% 23.0% 27.9% 46.3% 36.9% 42.1%

4.3.5 In terms of the volume of total through trips, there are 264 and 110 two-way vehicle through-trips observed during the AM and PM peak hours respectively. This equates to approximately 49% and 28% through traffic during the AM and PM peak hours. During a 12-hour period there were 1,766 through trips recorded which equates to approximately 42% of trips. The traffic surveys showed that the volume of through traffic is significantly higher in the northbound direction during the AM peak hour (83% northbound) and 12-hour day (61% northbound). During the PM peak the split of through traffic is more balanced.

Analysis of Vehicle Types

4.3.6 The ANPR survey also identified the breakdown of different vehicle types that use Whitehouse Lane. The vehicle types have been broken into four categories: Car / Motorbike, Light Goods Vehicle (Van or similar), Bus / Coach and HGV which is in this case considered to be an articulated lorry or larger.

4.3.7 Table 4-2 below presents the breakdown of vehicle types by time period and direction. The proportion that each vehicle type forms of the overall total is also demonstrated.


15


Table 4-2: Breakdown of Vehicle Type on Whitehouse Lane

Cars / Mbike LGV HGV Bus / Coach Total

Flow % Flow % Flow % Flow % Flow

AM Peak

Whitehouse Ln NE/B 353 87% 50 12% 3 1% 0 0% 406

Whitehouse Ln SW/B 106 77% 32 23% 0 0% 0 0% 138

Whitehouse Ln 2-way 459 84% 82 15% 3 1% 0 0% 544

PM Peak




12 Hour




4.3.8 As shown in the table above, the vast majority of vehicles that currently use Whitehouse Lane are either cars or light goods vehicles (LGV). Very few HGVs or bus / coaches use the route, with only 62 two-way vehicles of these types recorded over a typical 12-hour period which equates to approximately 5 per hour. In addition, there are very few HGVs or Bus / Coaches recorded in the survey during the AM or PM peak hours, suggesting that the majority of large vehicle movements are undertaken outside of the peak hours, further reducing the impact on the busiest period on the highway network.

4.3.9 Whilst concerns have been raised regarding the level of large vehicles that use Whitehouse Lane and the resulting impact of any improvements in the vicinity may have, the evidence presented in Table 4-2 suggests that this is unlikely to be the case.

4.4 Options for Whitehouse Lane Traffic Management / Closure (Qualitative Analysis)

4.4.1 Through discussions with BCC it has been considered that the following options for Whitehouse Lane should be considered:

Option A: Full Closure of Whitehouse Lane in front of proposed station building;

Option B: Whitehouse Lane one-way southbound between Philip Street and Windmill Hill; and

Option C: Whitehouse lane one-way northbound between Philip Street and Windmill Hill.

4.4.2 The options along with their potential advantages and disadvantages are described below. A summary of the current position on the option is also provided.

Option A Full closure of Whitehouse Lane to motorised traffic

4.4.3 This option will provide a closure of Whitehouse Lane between the junction with Windmill Hill and the junction with Clarke Street. There are several advantages to support this option. These are listed below:


16


The closure of Whitehouse Lane creates additional space for the new railway station building on the north side of the railway line;

Improves public realm in front of the proposed station building and in the vicinity of the green;

Encourages the use of the station and encourages other sustainable modes as connecting ‘last mile’ trips through the improvement of the environment and public realm in the vicinity of the station;

Encourages walking and cycling along Whitehouse Lane by reducing vehicle trips and therefore improving the environment along this route;

Prevents rat running through Whitehouse Lane; and

Likely to significantly reduce rat running through Windmill Hill.

4.4.4 There are several disadvantages due to the closure of lane to the motorised traffic. These are listed below:

Whitehouse Lane businesses would not have direct access from the west and will need to use East Street and Philip Street or York Road instead;

Windmill Hill residents lose access through Whitehouse Lane and will need to travel along the A38 to access the Whitehouse Lane Industrial Estate or York Road;

This option has the potential to increase vehicle flows along A38 (Dalby Avenue / Bedminster Parade). Analysis of the ANPR surveys suggest that to the north of the Hereford Street junction these would increase by approximately 550 vehicles in the AM peak hour and 400 vehicles in the PM peak hour. It should be noted that this assessment assumes that no vehicles re-route to use alternative connections through the network or transfer to other modes or take place outside of peak; and

The option has the potential to increase right turning movements from Hereford Street onto the A38. This will increase the likelihood of requiring a signalised junction onto the A38.

4.4.5 Through discussion with BCC it has been agreed that this option does not represent a viable way forward due to the need to continue to serve businesses along Whitehouse Lane. On this basis, Option A to close Whitehouse Lane in both directions has been discounted and will not be analysed any further within this report.

Option B – Whitehouse Lane One-way Southbound Only

4.4.6 This option provides a closure of road between Windmill Hill and Philip Street in the northbound direction thereby making the road open to southbound traffic only. The advantages of this option are listed below:

Improvements to public realm could be realised in front of the station due to the reduction in vehicle numbers but watered down when compared to full closure;

Discourages rat running through Windmill Hill (this occurs predominantly in a northbound direction);

Encourages walking and cycling along Whitehouse Lane by reducing vehicle trips and allowing additional width for sustainable modes, thereby improving the environment along this route but not as significantly as full closure;


17


Likely to provide the required width to introduce a segregated cycle route along Whitehouse Lane; and

Removes rat running in a northbound direction along Whitehouse Lane.

4.4.7 The disadvantages of this option are listed below:

Whitehouse Lane businesses would not have direct inbound access from the west and will need to use East Street and Philip Street or York Road instead;

Windmill Hill residents lose outbound access through Whitehouse Lane;

This option has the potential to increase vehicle flows on the A38, although not to the same extent as could be expected were the option to fully close the road progressed; and

Traffic generated by Plots 1,3 and 5 travelling to and from locations to the north will be required to use either Windmill Hill or Dean Lane which will add time to the journey and potentially add to the amount of through traffic using Windmill Hill.

Option C – Whitehouse Lane One-Way Northbound Only

4.4.8 This option provides a closure of Whitehouse Lane between Windmill Hill and Windmill Close in the southbound direction thereby making the road open to northbound traffic only. The advantages of this option are listed below:

Improvements to public realm could be realised in front of the station due to the reduction in vehicle numbers but watered down when compared to full closure;

Encourages walking and cycling along Whitehouse Lane by reducing vehicle trips and allowing additional width for sustainable modes, thereby improving the environment along this route but not as significantly as full closure;

Likely to provide the required width to introduce a segregated cycle route along Whitehouse Lane; and

Removes through traffic using the route in a southbound direction along Whitehouse Lane.

Traffic generated by Plots 1, 3 and 5 travelling to and from locations to the north are able to use a more direct route without the need to use alternative routes via Windmill Hill or Deane Lane.

4.4.9 The disadvantages of this option are listed below:

Does not discourage through traffic through Windmill Hill (this occurs predominantly in a northbound direction);

Whitehouse Lane businesses would not have direct outbound access to the west and will need to use East Street and Philip Street or York Road instead;

Windmill Hill residents lose inbound access through Whitehouse Lane; and

Has the potential to increase vehicle flows on the A38, but not as significant as with full closure.


18


Summary

4.4.10 This section has set out the potential advantages and disadvantages considered for the three options changing routing and circulation patterns on Whitehouse Lane. On the basis of the above, Option A, proposing to close Whitehouse Lane in its entirety, has been discounted and will not be considered further due to the impact on servicing of the existing units on Whitehouse Lane.

4.4.11 Out of the two remaining options and notwithstanding BCCs intended public engagement exercise on the options, from a development perspective and in consideration of the pros and cons presented above the Consortium have a preference for the delivery of Option C, northbound only. Analysis of the traffic impact under both option scenarios has, however, been considered in the following sections of this report.

4.5 Options for Philip Street

4.5.1 In addition to the options set out above for the potential changes to Whitehouse Lane, further consideration has been given to the closure of Phillip Street at the southern end, where it currently connects with Whitehouse Lane.

4.5.2 The advantages of this option are set out below:

Discourage rat-running between Whitehouse Lane and East Street;

Improves the environment for cyclists and pedestrians by reducing vehicle traffic;

Cycle improvements are proposed on Whitehouse Lane and the route taken by cyclists will cross the carriageway adjacent to junction with Phillip Street. Stopping up the southern end of Phillip Street will enhance the safety of cyclists using the new Whitehouse Lane cycle facilities;

Will improve the safety of the cyclists and pedestrians using Phillip Street due to reduced vehicle speeds and numbers; and

Improvement to the amenity of residences and businesses that front on to Phillip Street due to reduced vehicle speeds and numbers.

4.5.3 The disadvantages of this option are set out below:

The closure of Phillip Street in combination with Option C would result in all northbound development traffic being required to use the York Street arm of Bedminster Bridge Roundabout, potentially further compounding existing congestion issues at this location;

Residences and Businesses that front on to Phillip Street will only be able to gain access via East Street or Stillhouse Lane and will subsequently increase journey times to travel to locations to the east; and

HGV or large vehicle access will be limited at the southern section of the road due to lack of turning facilities on Philip Street.

Summary

4.5.4 The above section has set out the advantages and disadvantages of stopping up the southern end of Philip Street. Whilst some advantages have been identified in terms of improving the environment of the route with reduced traffic levels, the accessibility for HGVs and the existing land uses that front onto Phillip Street mean that this option has not been considered further in agreement with BCC.


19


4.6 Options for Whitehouse Lane – Potential Changes to Traffic Flows at Hereford Street/A38 Malago Road Junction

4.6.1 As set out above, there are two principal traffic management options for Whitehouse Lane to enable a better public realm to be delivered in support of the new Bedminster Station frontage and to provide a new segregated cycle lane. These options and associated highway alterations will have an impact on the flow of traffic in the immediate vicinity, in particular at the Hereford Street / A38 Malago Road junction which currently operates as a priority T-junction. This section focusses on the potential impact at this junction should one-way working be implemented on Whitehouse Lane (Option B or Option C).

4.6.2 There are two proposals to alter the layout of the Hereford Street / A38 Malago Road junction, dependent on whether Option B or Option C is progressed.

4.6.3 If Option B (one-way southbound) is taken forward, then right turners from Malago Road and right turners from Hereford Street will be prohibited. This will leave the junction as a ‘left in, left out only’ arrangement. A new central splitter island at the Hereford Street bellmouth will be required. This arrangement is shown in Drawing 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A.

4.6.4 Should Option C (one-way northbound) be taken forward, all movements will be permitted at the junction aside from the right turn into Malago Road from Hereford Street. Traffic wishing to undertake this movement would be catered for by Phillip Street or York Road to the east, both of which provide a connection between Whitehouse Lane and Malago Road (A38). A ghost Island right turn lane will be required at the junction. This arrangement is shown in Drawing 41030/5501/NB001 Rev A.

4.6.5 In order to assess the impact of the proposed alterations, the traffic flows have been modelled under both proposed arrangements, as well as in its existing layout for comparison purposes. The impact of the junction arrangement options has also been considered for a future year scenario.

Traffic Surveys and Traffic Growth

4.6.6 In order to assess the operation of the junction, reference has been made to the two manual count surveys that have been undertaken at both junctions. The Malago Road / Hereford Street survey was completed in 2015 whilst the Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane / Hereford Street junction was surveyed in 2018.

4.6.7 On this basis the flows at the Malago Road / Hereford Street junction have been growthed to ensure that they are comparable with the 2018 survey data. This has been undertaken by calculating the proportional increase between the flows in each direction and applying this change to the 2015 flows. In this way a 2018 scenario has been calculated and are shown in Figures 4.8 and 4.9.

4.6.8 These 2018 traffic flows have then been adjusted to represent future conditions in a forecast year. For the purposes of this assessment, the 2018 surveyed traffic has been growthed to a future forecast year of 2031 which is the end of the BCC Local Plan Period.

4.6.9 In order to account for background traffic growth in this future year scenario, growth factors have been generated using the National Trip End Model via the TEMPro version 7.2 software based on the Bristol 039 Middle Super Output Area (MSOA), within which the study area is located. The resulting TEMPro growth factors are shown in Table 4-3 below and the TEMPro output reports are included in Appendix A.


20


Table 4-3: TEMPro growth factors

Time Period Forecast Growth Factor (2018-2031)

AM Peak 1.1762

PM Peak 1.1665

4.6.10 These growth factors have been applied to the 2018 traffic flows in order to generate 2031 forecast year traffic. These flows are set out in Figure 4-10.

Traffic Movements for Option B (Southbound Traffic Only)

4.6.11 To establish the level of traffic that is forecast to use the Hereford Street / Malago Road junction in Option B, analysis has been undertaken to identify the redistribution of existing traffic if northbound traffic cannot use Whitehouse Lane. This has been undertaken based on the ANPR survey data obtained in December 2018, which identifies the origins and destinations of vehicles that travel along Whitehouse Lane. In addition, manual count surveys were undertaken at the Whitehouse Lane / Windmill Hill / Hereford Street junction during the same period. Using this data, the likely redistribution of traffic has been estimated.

4.6.12 Under a scenario where Option B is progressed, the traffic will be unable to travel on Whitehouse Lane in a northbound direction. This will therefore also result in an impact on traffic movements at the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane Junction.

4.6.13 Traffic travelling from Hereford Street towards Whitehouse Lane and from Windmill Hill to Whitehouse Lane will not be able to undertake those movements and therefore alternative route choices will be made by drivers. Table 4-4 below summarises the alternative movements and resulting flow change on the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane Junction. The traffic flows have been extracted from the December 2018 MCC surveys.

Table 4-4: Option B Hereford St / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Ln Junction Traffic Flow Changes

Existing Movement

2018 AM Peak Flow

2018 PM Peak Flow

Alternative Movement

Altered AM Peak Flow

Altered PM Peak Flow

Windmill Hill to Hereford Street

80 68 Traffic can no longer turn right

onto Malago road, so it is

required to take an alternative route. Traffic

has been presumed to travel either

clockwise from St Johns Lane

to Malago Road west, or anti-

clockwise from St Johns Lane and St Lukes Road to York

Road.

47 42


21


Existing Movement

2018 AM Peak Flow

2018 PM Peak Flow




Windmill Hill to Whitehouse

Lane

143 43 Not permitted. Traffic will

reroute via St Johns Lane. 50% of traffic will impact on Malago Road / Hereford Street

movement

0 0

Hereford Street to Windmill Hill

39 90 Traffic will not turn into

Hereford Street from Malago

Road West and will instead

remain travelling northeast on

Malago Road as right turn into

Hereford Street banned. As

traffic cannot continue on Whitehouse

Lane, presumed all Hereford

Street traffic will turn right into

Windmill Hill and originate from Malago Road

East

38 49

Hereford Street to Whitehouse

Lane

263 99 Not permitted. Traffic will use

alternative route

0 0

Whitehouse Lane to Windmill

Hill

34 82 Unchanged 34 82

Whitehouse Lane to

Hereford Street

104 170 Unchanged 104 170

4.6.14 Table 4-4 above identifies the forecast alteration to traffic flows as a result of the implementation of Option B at the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane Junction.

4.6.15 Traffic changes at the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane junction will have an impact on the level and distribution of traffic at the Hereford Street / A38 Malago Road Junction.

4.6.16 The majority of eastbound traffic that currently travels from Malago Road to Whitehouse Lane is generated by right turn movements from Malago Road West. As this movement will not be permitted under Option B, Eastbound traffic will solely be generated by traffic turning left from Malago Road East.


22


4.6.17 Table 4-5 below summarises the traffic flow movements under the existing layout and also the resulting adjustments to these flows under a scenario where Option B is progressed.

Table 4-5: Hereford St / Malago Rd Traffic Flow Changes following implementation of Option B

Existing Movement

2018 AM Peak Flow

2018 PM Peak Flow




Hereford Street to Malago Road

West

151 212 Unchanged 151 212


East

33 26 Not Permitted. Traffic will take

alternative route via St Johns

Lane or Windmill Hill

0 0

Malago Road West to

Hereford Street

264 156 Not Permitted 0 0

Malago Road West to Malago

Road East

626 370 No change to existing flow, but flow increased

due to redistributed traffic from

Windmill Hill using St Johns Lane. Traffic

originally turning right into

Hereford street will continue straight on.

978 560

Malago Road East to Hereford

Street

38 49 Unchanged 38 49

Malago Road East to Malago

Road West

347 700 Unchanged 347 700

4.6.18 The resulting adjusted flow movements have been included within the capacity assessment for this junction are set out later in this Chapter. The resulting redistributed traffic flows are presented in Figure 4-11.

Traffic Movements for Option C (Northbound Traffic Only)

4.6.19 The process set out above has been repeated for the scenario where the southbound movement on Whitehouse Lane is banned. Again, reference has been made to the available survey data and Whitehouse Lane / Windmill Hill survey data in order to forecast the likely redistribution of traffic that will occur as a result of the alteration to Whitehouse Lane. Table 4-6 summarises the alternative movements and resulting flow change on the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane Junction under a scenario where Option C is progressed.


23


Table 4-6: Option C Hereford St / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Ln Junction Traffic Flow Changes

Existing Movement

2018 AM Peak Flow

2018 PM Peak Flow




Windmill Hill to Hereford Street

80 68 Traffic that would turn right from Hereford

Street to Malago Road East and originate from

Windmill Hill has been removed

from this movement

47 42

Windmill Hill to Whitehouse

Lane

143 43 Unchanged 143 43

Hereford Street to Windmill Hill

39 90 50% of traffic travelling to Windmill Hill

from Whitehouse

Lane using this route, via

Malago Road East

56 131

Hereford Street to Whitehouse

Lane

263 99 Unchanged 263 99

Whitehouse Lane to Windmill

Hill


Whitehouse Lane to

Hereford Street


4.6.20 Table 4-6 above identifies the forecast alteration to traffic flows as a result of the implementation of Option C at the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane Junction.

4.6.21 Traffic changes at the Hereford Street / Windmill Hill / Whitehouse Lane junction will have an impact on the level and distribution of traffic at the Hereford Street / A38 Malago Road Junction.

4.6.22 Table 4-7 below summarises the traffic flow movements under the existing layout and also the resulting adjustments to these flows under a scenario where Option C is progressed.


24


Table 4-7: Hereford St / Malago Rd Traffic Flow Changes following implementation of Option C

Existing Movement

2018 AM Peak Flow

2018 PM Peak Flow





West

151 212 Flow comprises of traffic

originally turning undertaking this movement from

Windmill Hill only

47 42


East

33 26 Not permitted 0 0

Malago Road West to

Hereford Street

264 156 Unchanged 264 156

Malago Road West to Malago

Road East

626 370 Existing flow unchanged, but flow increased due to traffic

from Windmill Hill using St

Johns Lane as an alternative

route

642 396

Malago Road East to Hereford

Street

38 49 Increased traffic due to

movements travelling from Whitehouse

Lane to Windmill Hill using

Malago Road as an alternative

route

55 90


Road West

347 700 Increased due to movements

travelling from Whitehouse

Lane Hereford Street using

alternative route via Malago road

in order to continue to the

west.

399 785

4.6.23 The resulting adjusted flow movements have been included within the capacity assessment for this junction set out later in this Chapter. The resulting redistributed traffic flows are presented in Figure 4-12.


25


4.6.24 The TEMPRO growth factors set out in Table 4-3 have been applied to the traffic movements presented above for both Option B and Option C. This produces traffic flows for both option for the 2031 future year scenario, which are presented in Figures 4-13 and 4-14.

4.7 Impact of Option B and C on Development Trip Distribution

4.7.1 The impact of the development on the existing and proposed junction arrangement also needs to be considered. In order to do this, reference has been made to the Development Trip Generation analysis contained within the Stage 1 TA.

4.7.2 For reference, the proposed net vehicle trip generation of the proposed development has been extracted from the S1TA and is presented in Table 4-8 below.

Table 4-8: Development Vehicle Trip Generation

Plot No:

AM Peak PM Peak 12 Hour

In Out Two-way In Out Two-

way In Out Two-way

Plot 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 6 6 13

Plot 2 2 7 9 8 4 12 53 53 106

Plot 3 -47 11 -36 14 -9 6 -64 -64 -127

Plot 4 -13 15 2 20 -3 18 44 51 95

Plot 5 -3 36 33 39 12 52 217 222 439

Total -61 71 9 83 5 89 256 269 525

4.7.3 The development trips for each plot set out above have been distributed through the Hereford Street / Malago Road junction under its existing arrangement, which allows for all movements. The traffic generated by each plot was distributed separately based on each access location as well as the wider distribution analysis undertaken at an earlier stage of the project. The vehicle distribution on which this analysis is presented in Figure 8.1 attached to the Stage 1 TA.

4.7.4 A summary of the two-way development traffic distribution by plot is set out in Table 4-9 below. Traffic associated with some plots is forecast to use routes that will avoid the Hereford Street / Malago Road junction. For example, traffic travelling east from Plot 2 will use the A38 East street and, as such, not travel through the junction. Therefore, the percentage figures in the table will not necessarily add up to 100%.


26


Table 4-9: Traffic Distribution by Plot

Plot No. Malago Road East to Malago

Road West

Malago Road East

to Hereford

Street

Hereford Street to Malago Road West

Hereford Street to Malago Road East

Malago Road

West to Malago Road East

Malago Road

West to Hereford

Street

Plot 1 0% 73.4% 73.4% 26.6% 0% 26.6%

Plot 2 26.6% 1.4% 0% 1.4% 26% 0%

Plot 3 13.5% 0% 13.5% 0% 13.5% 13.5%

Plot 4 26.6% 1.4% 0% 1.4% 26.6% 0%

Plot 5 0% 73.4% 26.6% 73.4% 0% 26.6%

4.7.5 Applying the vehicle trip generation of each plot presented in Table 4-8 to the distribution in Table 4-9 allowed the total development impact at the junction to be identified. Vehicle movements for both AM and PM Peaks at the junction, under its existing arrangement are shown in Table 4-10.

Table 4-10: Development traffic distribution at Malago Road / Hereford Street junction

Time Period


Road West

Malago Road East

to Hereford

Street



Malago Road


Malago Road

West to Hereford

Street

AM Peak Hour

7 -2 11 27 -9 -7

PM Peak Hour

-1 29 2 9 9 12

4.7.6 The traffic flows set out above are also presented in Figure 4-15.

4.7.7 Once the distribution of development traffic under the junction in its existing arrangement was established, alterations to traffic movements could be made to reflect the proposed alternative options for the junction in Options B and C as set out below.

Option B – Southbound Only on Whitehouse Lane

4.7.8 As set out previously, this option proposes a ‘left in, left out’ layout at the junction, prohibiting right turns into either Malago Road or Hereford Street. The development traffic set out in table 4-10 has been redistributed to reflect the available and prohibited movements. The redistribution of traffic flows as a result of implementing Option B is summarised below and then presented in Table 4-11:

Traffic approaching from Malago Road East remains unchanged


27


All traffic approaching from Hereford Street now turns left into Malago Road. Additional development will traffic also be required to undertake this movement under Option B. Traffic generated from the eastern portion of Plot 3, which would previously travelled north east on Whitehouse Lane and can no longer do so will be required to use the left turn out of Hereford Street and then use an alternative route to access locations to the north and east. In reality, a small proportion of this traffic may choose to use routes via Windmill Hill, but in order to be robust for the purposes of this assessment all traffic has been routed through the Hereford Street / Malago Road junction.

All traffic approaching from Malago Road West is required to continue ahead and will reach locations to the south of Malago road via alternative routes to the east.

4.7.9 The redistribution of development traffic under the Option B scenario is presented in Table 4-11 below and also in Figure 4-16.

Table 4-11: Option B - redistributed development traffic

Time Period


Road West

Malago Road East

to Hereford

Street



Malago Road


Malago Road

West to Hereford

Street

AM Peak Hour

7 -2 42 0 -16 0

PM Peak Hour

-1 29 8 0 21 0

Option C – Northbound Only on Whitehouse Lane

4.7.10 The junction design that will form part of Option C prohibits vehicles from turning right out of Hereford street, but otherwise allows all movements. The development traffic set out in table 4-10 has been redistributed to reflect the available movements. The redistribution of traffic flows as a result of implementing Option C is summarised below and then presented in Table 4-12:

Traffic approaching from Malago Road East remains unchanged, but also includes traffic travelling to the eastern portion of Plot 3, accessed via Whitehouse Lane, which can no longer travel down that link from the north and as such will use Malago Road and turn into Hereford street.

Traffic approaching from Hereford Street will include left turners and 50% of those who were previously turning right. These right turners will use Malago Road and then Sheene Road to access locations to the north. The other 50% will be expected to travel north east on Whitehouse Lane and continue to locations to the north and east of the site via alternative routes.

Traffic approaching from Malago Road west will remain unchanged.

4.7.11 The redistribution of development traffic under the Option B scenario is presented in Table 4-12 below and also in Figure 4-17


28


Table 4-12: Option C - redistributed development traffic

Time Period


Road West

Malago Road East

to Hereford

Street



Malago Road


Malago Road

West to Hereford

Street

AM Peak Hour

7 -19 24 0 -9 -7

PM Peak Hour

-1 34 6 0 9 12

4.7.12 The development vehicle trips for Option B and Option C and summarised in the tables above has been added to the baseline traffic to generate the scenarios for modelling. These have been assessed in the models built for each version of the junction and are set out in the following section.

4.8 Junction Capacity Analysis

4.8.1 The development traffic set out above has been added to the baseline traffic to produce scenarios for modelling. Each option for the junction (Existing Arrangement, Option B and Option C) have been modelled for the 2018 base and 2031 future year scenarios. These traffic flow scenarios are presented in Figures 4-18 to 4-20.

4.8.2 The traffic flows have been modelled using the PICADY module of Junctions 9. The capacity analysis results are presented in terms of ‘ratio of flow to capacity’ (RFC) and mean/max queue lengths in PCUs. For reference, it is generally considered that where the RFC is less than 85%, the junction is operating within capacity and operating at capacity between 85%-100%. All values above 100% mean that a junction is operating above capacity.

4.8.3 The capacity analysis results for each scenario are shown in Tables 4-13 to 4-18 below for the AM and PM peak hours respectively. In addition to the operation of the junction under scenarios where one-way working is installed on Whitehouse Lane, the operation of the junction under its current layout, without any alteration in flows or the addition of development traffic has also been modelled to provide further context. Junction modelling output reports are included in Appendix A.

Table 4-13: Hereford Street / Malago Road Existing Arrangement - AM Peak

AM Peak Hereford Street Malago Road

RFC Delay Queue RFC Delay Queue

2018 Baseline 0.29 22.0 0.4 0.55 13.39 1.3

2031 Baseline 0.38 35.30 0.6 0.67 16.18 2.5


29


Table 4-14: Hereford Street / Malago Road Existing Arrangement - PM Peak

PM Peak Hereford Street Malago Road


2018 Baseline 0.50 25.60 1.0 0.40 13.61 0.7

2031 Baseline 0.67 51.31 0.5 0.51 17.16 1.1

Table 4-15: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option B Arrangement - AM Peak



2018 + Development

0.34 8.86 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0

2031 + Development

0.40 10.09 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

Table 4-16: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option B Arrangement - PM Peak



2018 + Development

0.47 13.50 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0

2031 + Development

0.59 18.78 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

Table 4-17: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option C Arrangement - AM Peak



2018 + Development

0.13 7.06 0.2 0.54 13.54 1.3

2031 + Development

0.16 7.52 0.2 0.67 16.51 2.5


30


Table 4-18: Hereford Street / Malago Road Option C Arrangement - PM Peak



2018 + Development

0.11 8.73 0.1 0.47 16.15 0.9

2031 + Development

0.14 9.90 0.2 0.60 21.22 1.7

4.8.4 The results of the capacity analysis presented in the tables above indicate that the junction would operate with spare capacity in all scenarios. The highest RFC encountered is 0.67 on:

Malago Road in the 2031 baseline scenario AM peak under the existing arrangement

Hereford Street in the 2031 baseline scenario PM Peak under the existing arrangement.

Malago Road in the 2031 with development scenario AM peak under the Option C (northbound only) arrangement

4.8.5 In general, the RFCs in the with development scenarios are comparable with the 2018 and 2031 reference case scenarios. The junctions operate well within capacity in all scenarios.

4.8.6 On this basis it is considered that the implementation of changes to the Malago Road / Hereford Street junction associated with making Whitehouse Lane one-way (northbound or southbound) and the principle of maintaining a priority junction in this location is considered acceptable in highway operational terms.

4.8.7 Notwithstanding the above, it should be noted that the Hereford Street / Malago Road junction has been modelled in isolation from the junctions up and downstream along the A38. The junction has been modelled in this way to allow for analysis between the existing arrangement and the alternative junction layout arrangements considered.

4.8.8 On this basis the modelling results do not consider any existing queueing that occurs along the A38 corridor as a result of congestion from junctions up and down stream, however, the modelling does demonstrate that any queueing on the A38 corridor is not caused by the Malago Road / Hereford Street junction.

4.8.9 Stantec consider that any queueing on the A38 caused by junctions up and downstream would not have a significant impact on the operation of this junction, especially with either of the alternative layout arrangements (Options B and C) in place. In these scenarios, the right turn movement from Hereford Street onto Malago Road has been banned and therefore no vehicles are attempting across two lanes of queueing traffic. It is considered that traffic turning left onto the Malago Road will be able to do so fitting into gaps into any queueing traffic with drivers giving way for each other. Similarly, it is considered that gaps will be made in any queueing traffic on Malago Road to enable drivers to turn right into Hereford Street in Option C. In the Option B scenario, the right turn into Hereford Street is banned.

4.9 Proposed Improvements to Cycle Facilities

4.9.1 As part of the above proposals, it is proposed to extend the existing segregated cycle facilities, which currently cease at Windmill Close, towards the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue via Bedminster station.


31


4.9.2 At this stage, it is proposed that the Whitehouse Lane carriageway will be narrowed to provide the following pedestrian and cycle corridor improvements:

1. A segregated cycle route on its western side which will continue on the western side of the carriageway to Philip Street where it will cross and connect to the existing segregated route on the eastern side of the carriageway at Windmill Close.

2. An improved footway facility will be provided on the eastern side of the carriageway.

3. Improved crossing facilities will be provided by the junction with Windmill Hill, outside of the Station, to the east of Clarke Street, at the eastern edge of the Plot 3 boundary and 2 in the vicinity of the Philip Street junction.

4. Some on-street parking will need to be removed to facilitate the proposed improvements, however it is proposed that new on-street parking will be located along the carriageway in the vicinity of the Plot 3 frontage. 10 public spaces can be provided in the southbound only option and 9 spaces in the northbound option with a 10m loading bay also provided.

4.9.3 The concept design of these improvements is shown on Drawings 41030/5501/SB001 Rev A and NB001 Rev A.

4.9.4 The proposed improvements will provide a continuous, segregated cycleway connection between the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue in the south to York Road in the north. The route will pass through the centre of BGFA. Onward connections are available to the south of Whitehouse Lane towards East Street via Little Paradise, and to the north towards the City Centre and the Temple Quarter. As set out in Section 3.2, appropriate signalised crossings will be provided across the A38.

Summary

4.9.5 This Chapter confirms that the implementation of improvements to Whitehouse Lane will be acceptable in highway operational terms and will provide advantages to the existing and future community.


32


5 Vehicular Access and Parking Strategy 5.1 Plot Access

5.1.1 At the time of writing the vehicular access strategy for the development is as follows:

Plot 1: The plots parking is proposed to be accessed directly from Hereford Street and Malago Road with 2 disabled bays provided behind the footway in each location. A service layby will be provided on both the A38 Malago Road and Hereford Street.

Plot 2: Access to the main car park for the plot will be provided via Little Paradise, Leicester Street (which will be extended to connect with Little Paradise) and Mill Lane. It is proposed that Stafford Street is downgraded with all moves banned at the A38 Malago Road junction with the exception of the outbound right turn. It is anticipated that Stafford Street would predominantly be used only by service vehicles with other trips using Leicester Street and Little Paradise. The plot will also be serviced via a priority T-Junction onto the A38 Dalby Avenue in a similar location to the existing service access.

Plot 3: The main plot access is proposed to be from the A38 Dalby Avenue to the north of the existing car park access. A secondary access will be provided via Clarke street. HGVs will access the site via Dalby Avenue and exit the site via Clarke Street, therefore ensuring that large vehicles are not required to turn within the Plot for egress via Dalby street.

Plot 4: The plot is proposed to be accessed via Little Paradise and Leicester Street (which will be extended to connect with Little Paradise). It is proposed that Stafford Street is downgraded with all moves banned at the A38 Malago Road junction with the exception of the outbound right turn. It is anticipated that Stafford Street would predominantly be used only by service vehicles with other trips using Leicester Street and Little Paradise.

Plot 5: The plot is proposed to be split with access provided from Hereford Street and Whitehouse Lane / Clarke Street.

5.2 Parking Strategy

Private Parking

5.2.1 As set out in the Stage 1 TA, each of the BGFA plots are proposing to provide levels of private parking that fall well below BCC’s parking standards set out in the SADMP document. This approach embeds the concept of sustainable travel in the heart of the community by showing private cars do not take priority. Proposed parking levels are set out in Table 5.1.


33


Table 5-1: Private Parking Provision

Plot No. of Proposed Residential Units

Proposed Private Parking Provision

No. of Proposed

Student Units Proposed Student Parking Provision

Plot 1 0 - 500 4

Plot 2 205 27 0 -

Plot 3 50 25 700 38

Plot 4 316 73 0 -

Plot 5a&b 426 135 0 -

Totals 997 260 1,242 42

5.2.2 The Stage 1 TA identifies that the forecast mode share for vehicle trips is 19.1%. This is reflective of the likely travel characteristics of the site and provides a realistic mode share based on the site location, reduced car parking provision and existing and proposed sustainable travel infrastructure. The proposed development is therefore likely to have a low car dependency and a parking strategy has been developed to ensure that there is very limited potential for overspill within the local area.

5.2.3 In considering the developments commitment to having a low car dependency a review of the local Residents Parking Scheme (RPS) has been undertaken as set out below.

Bedminster East Resident’s Parking Scheme

5.2.4 The BGFA sits within the Bedminster East RPS, as shown on Figure 5.1. It is active Monday to Friday between 9am and 5pm, during which times a permit or pay and display ticket (up to three hours) is required to park in the area.

5.2.5 It is acknowledged that BCC applies restrictions on parking permits for car free or low car developments. It is therefore considered reasonable to restrict the allocation of parking permits for new residents at the site. This could be secured by an appropriately worded planning condition in due course.

5.2.6 The southern boundary of the Bedminster East RPS lies to the north of the railway line. Roads to the south of the railway line, including Windmill Hill, are therefore not covered by the RPS. It is therefore recognised that whilst the low level of parking proposed is appropriate for a city centre location, the approach of limiting parking provision on site will need to be accompanied by parking management arrangements on nearby residential streets to ensure that there is very limited potential for overspill parking within the local area.

5.2.7 In order to understand the potential areas that may be impacted by parking associated with the site, isochrone drawings have been prepared which consider the walk distance from the site. Figure 5.1 illustrates walk times of 5 minutes (400m), 7.5 minutes (600m) and 10 minutes (800m) from the site (based on a standard walking speed of 4.8km/hr). An adjustment has then been applied to account for gradient utilising Naismith’s Rule which states that for every 10m of ascent an extra minute should be added to walking times.


34


5.2.8 In the context of the above, it is considered that it would be appropriate for the development to provide a financial contribution towards the extension of the RPS to cover likely affected areas outside of the current RPS boundary. The exact area to be included in any future scheme will need to be agreed with BCC and public consultation on the implementation of any new RPS will need to be undertaken by BCC. Any eventual financial contribution towards an RPS extension or alternative parking management scheme would be defined by a process to identify a maximum and appropriate contribution proportionate to the impact of the development. It is considered that the implementation and delivery of such a scheme will be undertaken by BCC.

Public Car Parking

Car Parks

5.2.9 The existing BCC operated car park at Little Paradise, within which there are currently 50 parking spaces, will be replaced by a multi storey car park on Plot 4B. The existing BCC operated 50 space car park at Hereford Street (part of Plot 5) and 11 space Little Paradise Disabled Car Park (part of Plot 4) will be relocated to the new multi-storey car park on Plot 4B. At the time of writing, the exact number of spaces within the multi-storey car park is not yet confirmed.

5.2.10 The privately operated car park on Plot 3 will be closed and not replaced with alternative spaces elsewhere.

On-Street

5.2.11 A number of on-street car parking spaces will be removed on Little Paradise and Stafford Street to accommodate the proposed development. However, the multi-storey car park proposed as part of Plot 4B will provide an alternative to these on-street spaces.

5.2.12 A number of spaces will also be removed along Whitehouse Lane as part of the proposed changes, these will be reduced in number and replaced by on street parking adjacent to the Plot 3 frontage.

Car Club

5.2.13 The BGFA Consortium is committed to providing six electric vehicle car club cars, parking spaces and charging infrastructure. These will be located in the multi-storey car park at Plot 4B.


35


6 Outline Travel Plan 6.1 Introduction

6.1.1 The BGFA will provide both general residential and student accommodation which require the preparation of a Travel Plan. The proposed ancillary facilities are anticipated to fall below BCC’s thresholds for requiring their own travel plans.

6.1.2 Each individual Plot within the BGFA will be required to prepare and submit their own Plot-Specific Full Travel Plan in due course. The Plot-Specific Travel Plans will further refine the design specifics for each Plot.

6.1.3 This Section sets out the overarching principles, aims and objectives for sustainable travel across the BGFA, and for minimising single car occupant trips. It will set out a holistic package of measures based on current knowledge and technology.

6.2 Potential Travel Plan Measures

6.2.1 The Travel Plan measures proposed are consistent with initiatives contained in the National and Local travel planning policy and guidance and draw upon the Department for Transport’s Guidance on Best Practice Guidelines for Travel Plans.

6.2.2 The objective of the measures will be to reduce single occupancy car use originating from the development by providing for, and promoting, alternative forms of transport.

Promotional Measures

6.2.3 The following measures could be implemented to promote the Travel Plan and encourage travel by modes other than the car:

Travel Information Packs, providing residents with information on walking, cycling and public transport, as well as offers and events.

Noticeboards will be provided within the BGFA. These notice boards will provide a space for additional promotion and awareness raising of sustainable travel options and events. The Plot developers will be responsible for providing the notice boards as part of the build-out; the TPC will be responsible for providing the content and keeping it updated.

National and local events, such as Walk to Work Week, will be promoted by BCC and advertised on the BGFA noticeboards.

Measures to Encourage Cycling

6.2.4 The following measures could be implemented to encourage cycling at BGFA:

Adult cycle training.

Provision of vouchers towards the purchase of a bicycle or bicycle equipment.

Implementation of a BGFA Bicycle User Group (BUG) – a local group of like-minded individuals who are interested in cycling.

Annual Dr. Bike sessions.

An annual membership of YoBike.


36


Measures to Encourage the Use of Public Transport

6.2.5 The following measures could be implemented to encourage the use of buses and trains at BGFA:

A free monthly bus ticket. BCC could liaise with local operators to secure free month bus tickets for the new occupants.

Measures to Reduce Private Car Use

6.2.6 The following measures could be implemented to reduce use of the private car at BGFA:

Low car parking provision on site.

Provision of six electric car club cars within BGFA.

A free annual membership to a Car Club. BCC could liaise with local car club operators to secure free annual membership for the new occupants.

Personalised Travel Planning

6.2.7 It is likely that Personalised Travel Planning (PTP) will be provided to all new home occupiers upon occupation. The residents’ individual travel needs will be discussed, and all the viable options outlined. Assistance with journey planning alongside incentives to change the way residents travel will be provided.

6.3 Travel Plan Coordinator Role

6.3.1 BCC’s Travel Plan Guidance document states that:

“As an alternative for residential development only, Bristol City Council will undertake implementation of the Travel Plan on the applicant's behalf. By paying an Implementation Fee of £135 per dwelling (2017 fee index linked), and entering into a Section 106/Unilateral undertaking with the Council, the developer would be released from the Travel Plan planning obligation over a 5-year period and also from the Management and Audit Fee that would otherwise apply. Under this approach, Bristol City Council would act as the site Travel Plan Coordinator for the life of the Travel Plan and would deliver a site-specific range of measures based on the approved Travel Plan, as well as undertake a survey, monitor, audit and review role.”

6.3.2 It is therefore proposed that BCC take on the TPC role for the BGFA for a period of 5 years, commencing from the point of first residential occupation. The funding for this will be secured through the S106 process.

6.4 Implementation, Targets and Monitoring

Implementation

6.4.1 As set out above, it is likely that BCC will be responsible for implementing, managing and monitoring the BGFA Travel Plan in their role as TPC.

6.4.2 The timescales for delivery of Full Travel Plans and the implementation of measures will therefore be set out by BCC in due course.


37


Targets

6.4.3 As part of the implementation and monitoring process, accurate baseline travel surveys will be undertaken by BCC, as the TPC, to set the baseline mode share and future targets for travel to and from the BGFA.

6.4.4 It should be recognised that until a baseline survey has been undertaken it will not be possible to set a bespoke mode share target, and that as many of the measures will be implemented prior to and during occupation, the effect of the Travel Plan will already be accounted for to some degree in the initial survey.

Monitoring

6.4.5 Travel Plans should be monitored regularly to ensure the measures agreed in the Action Plan / planning permission are being implemented, that it is delivering the modal shift required by the targets and that it is up-to-date and remains effective as situations change and new opportunities emerge.

6.4.6 BCC will be responsible for monitoring the Travel Plan, including the preparation of monitoring reports, where required.


38


7 Summary and Conclusions 7.1.1 Stantec has been commissioned by the Bedminster Green Framework Area Consortium

(BGFA Consortium) to provide highway and transport advice in support of the proposed mixed-use redevelopment scheme at Bedminster Green, Bristol.

7.1.2 The scheme comprises five separate development plots and is collectively known as the Bedminster Green Framework Area (BGFA). The BGFA Consortium consists of those in control of five separate plots, which collectively make up the framework area.

7.1.3 The proposed development site is located at Bedminster Green, Bristol. The BGFA as a whole seeks to deliver 1,242 student accommodation units, 997 new residential units, plus ancillary & community uses and car parking.

7.1.4 Each plot has agreed to provide a level of private residential parking well below BCC’s residential parking standards; an approach which embeds the concept of sustainable travel in the heart of the community by showing private cars do not take priority.

7.1.5 In addition, in discussion with BCC, Network Rail and the BGFA Consortium, options will be explored in terms of deliverability for improving and enhancing the existing Bedminster Station to provide closer connections to the MetroBus and local bus networks as well as East Street and Dalby Avenue.

7.1.6 This Stage 2 TA has demonstrated that the BGFA will provide a comprehensive public transport strategy which will deliver new bus lanes and bus stops on the A38 through the BGFA. The walk and cycle strategy confirm that the development will provide improvements to Whitehouse Lane and a financial contribution towards improvements to Dean Lane will be considered by the Consortium.

7.1.7 A parking strategy has also been identified which confirms that the levels of car parking proposed at the site are appropriate and can be managed effectively through a contribution to extend the existing Residents Parking Scheme Area.

7.1.8 In summary, the proposed development will:

Provide CIL contributions towards a comprehensive public transport strategy including:

- An inbound bus lane on the A38 Malago Road / Dalby Avenue between St Johns Road and East Street.

- Relocate the southbound bus stop on Dalby Avenue.

- Provide a new bus stop on the northbound A38 carriageway between Little Paradise and Stafford Street

Explore options in terms of deliverability for potential future improvements and enhancements to Bedminster Railway Station access and public realm.

Provide a financial contribution via CIL towards highway, pedestrian and cycle improvements to the A38 corridor through the development area.

Provide a financial contribution via CIL towards highway, pedestrian and cycle improvements to Whitehouse Lane to provide a multi-modal corridor.

Consider a financial contribution via S106 towards improvements to Dean Lane between Warden Road and Coronation Road.


39


Provide low levels of car parking supplemented by:

- Provision of six electric car club cars, parking spaces and electric charging infrastructure.

- Allocation of BCC parking permits will be restricted.

- Potential financial contribution towards the implementation of a further RPS in the area.

- The relocation of public car parking into a multi-storey car park on Little Paradise.

Provide plot-specific Travel Plans that will be implemented by BCC in due course and includes measures to encourage sustainable travel.

7.1.9 It is envisaged that the proposed measures set out above would be secured through a combination of CIL, S106 obligations and / or planning conditions. Further discussions will be required between BCC and the Consortium to confirm which legal mechanism will be used to secure these provisions as part of the planning approval process.

7.1.10 Measures identified to support development across the BGFA will need to be fully costed by BCC and the scale of contributions justified, having regard to the normal tests applied through NPPF and CIL123 to ensure that the overall costs to the development are directly related, reasonable and proportionate in scale to the impacts of the development.





Figures

Public Transport StrategyBedminster Green


DraftDrawing: Figure 2.1

Date: 08/01/20Drawn by: AA

Checked by: KS

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright and database right 2020.

BGFA Consortium

J:\41030 Bedminster Green\Technical\Corel\Stage 2 TA\Stage 2 TA

4

23

1

5

B AA 12.04.19 PR

N

Indicative Site BoundaryKey:

Potential for East Streetto be improved and inbound bus servicestransferred to A38

Proposed inboundbus lane on DalbyAvenue

New busstop

Improved busstop

Potential for inboundbus services to transfer to A38Malago Road/DalbyAvenue

MetroWest proposals:Portishead branch linewill increase frequencyof trains throughBedminster towardsBristol Temple Meadsevery 30 minutes

Land safeguarded for future improvements to station entranceand public realm

4

23

1

5

B AA 12.04.19 PRIndicative Site BoundaryKey:

Potential for East Street inbound bus services to be transferred to A38

Proposed inboundbus lane on DalbyAvenue

New busstop

Improved busstop

Potential for inboundbus services to transfer to A38Malago Road/DalbyAvenue

MetroWest proposals:Portishead branch linewill increase frequencyof trains throughBedminster

Potential future improvements to the Station

Walking and Cycling Transport StrategyBedminster Green


DraftDrawing: Figure 3.1

Date: 08/01/20Drawn by: AA

Checked by: KS


BGFA Consortium

J:\41030 Bedminster Green\Technical\Corel\Stage 2 TA\Stage 2 TA

B AA 12.04.19 PR

Indicative site boundary

Key pedestrian route between East Street and Bedminster Station

Key local pedestrian / cycleroutes

Proposed Whitehouse Lane pedestrian / cycleimprovements

Existing segregated cycle route

Proposed pedestrian crossing

Existing pedestrian zone 7am-7pm (except buses and loading)

Existing signalised crossings

Proposed pedestrian / cycle crossing

Proposed Dean Lane pedestrian / cycle improvements

Key:

N

4

23

1

5

Bedminster Green Framework AreaFigure 4.1 - Location of ANPR Cameras

DraftDate: 06/01/20

Drawn by: AAChecked by: JH

BGFA Consortium

J:\41030 Bedminster Green\Technical\Corel\Stage 2 TA\Figure 4.1.cdr


Whitehouse LaneIndustrial Area

Windmill Hill

N

Indicative Location of ANPR Camera

KEY

Road closed during survey

Bedminster Green Framework AreaFigure 4.2 - Analysis of Whitehouse Lane Traffic Flows

AM (0800 - 0900) Southbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

30%42

3%4

16%22

6849%

16%2217%24

4633%

3%40%0

43%

33%4630%42

8864%

}

}

}

}

51%70}

33%46

0%0

17%24

Total through traffic( and routes)green yellow

Total through traffic, including traffic throughWindmill Hill to Whitehouse Lane ( , , and routes) green yellow pink

4633%

4633%

138


AM (0800 - 0900) Northbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

406

31%125

9%35

9%37

19749%

9%375%19

5614%

9%3514%58

9323%

32%13131%125

25663%

}

}

}

}

51%208}

32%131

14%58

5%19



16039%

21854%


PM (1700 - 1800) Southbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

22%55

0%0

29%74

12951%

29%744%11

8534%

0%01%3

31%

43%10929%55

16465%

}

}

}

}

49%123}

43%109

1%3

4%11

252



5522%

5823%


PM (1700 - 1800) Northbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

29%42

5%7

15%21

7049%

15%216%9

3021%

5%72%3

107%

43%6129%42

10372%

}

}

}

}

51%73}

43%61

2%3

6%9

142



4935%

5237%


12-Hour (0700 - 1900) Southbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

36%685

0%8

28%520

121364%

28%5201%22

54229%

0%80%4

120%

34%64836%685

133371%

}

}

}

}

36%674}

34%648

0%4

1%22

1888



69337%

69737%


12-Hour (0700 - 1900) Northbound

DraftDate: 06/01/20


BGFA Consortium




Windmill Hill

N

34%781

6%138

9%216

113549%

9%2164%103

31914%

6%1386%150

28812%

40%92434%781

170574%

}

}

}

}

51%1177}

40%924

6%150

4%103

2311



91940%

106946%

AM PEAK 590 PM PEAK 350

186 156

A38 / Malago Rd A38 / Malago Rd

327 663

27 49

121 26 168 21

Hereford Street Hereford Street


39 90

Hereford Street Whitehouse Lane Hereford Street Whitehouse Lane

104 170

34 82

80 143 68 43

Windmill Hill Windmill Hill

Date: 06/01/2019 Bedminster Green Stantec

Stage 2 Transport Assessment 10 Queen Square Bristol BS1 4NT

Client: Tel: 0117 332 7840 Email: pba.bristol@stantec,com

BGFA Consortium Figure 4-8: Surveyed Traffic Flows Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec

AM PEAK 626 TEMPro PM PEAK 370

264 AM PM 156

A38 / Malago Rd ### 1.1 1.1 A38 / Malago Rd

347 700

38 49

151 33 212 26

213 302 205 189

Growth Growth

184 147 1.25 #### 1.33 238 189 1.3 1.08 1.17



39 90


104 170

34 82

80 143 68 43





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-9: 2018 Base Traffic Flows Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


310 182


408 817

45 57

178 38 247 31





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-10: 2031 Base Traffic Flows Existing Arrangement Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


0 0


347 700

38 49

151 0 212 0


AM PEAK 0 PM PEAK 0

38 49


104 170

34 82

47 0 42 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-11: 2018 Redistributed Base Traffic - Option B Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


264 156


399 785

55 90

47 0 42 0



56 131


0 0

0 0

47 143 42 43





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-12: 2018 Redistributed Base Traffic - Option C Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


0 0


408 817

45 57

178 0 247 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-13: 2031 Redistributed Base Traffic - Option B Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


310 182


469 916

65 105

56 0 48 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-14: 2031 Redistributed Base Traffic - Option C Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec

AM PEAK -16 PM PEAK 21

0 0


7 -1

-2 29

42 0 8 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-16: Redistributed Development Traffic - Option B Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec

AM PEAK -9 PM PEAK 9

-7 12


7 -1

-19 34

24 0 6 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-17: Redistributed Development Traffic - Option C Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


303 194


415 816

43 86

189 65 249 40





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-18: 2031 Base + Development Traffic - Existing Arrangement Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


0 0


415 816

43 86

220 0 254 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-19: 2031 Base + Development Traffic - Option B Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec


303 194


477 915

46 139

80 0 55 0





BGFA Consortium Figure 4-20: 2031 Base + Development Traffic - Option C Website: www.stantec.com

© Stantec

Southvilleresidents'

parking scheme

Central Parking Zone

CentralParking

Zone Redclifferesidents'

parking scheme

Spike Islandresidents'

parking scheme

Bedminster Eastresidents'

parking scheme

Document Path: Z:\Projects\41030 Bedminster Green\02_mxd\41030_05_WalkingTimesGradient.mxd

Bedminster Green Framework AreaWalking Journey Times (With Gradient)

0 400200m

Contains OS data © Crown Copyright and database right 2019Contains public sector information licenced under the Open Government Licence v3.0© HERE 2016.

Client

Rev 07Figure 5.1

1:5,500 @ A3

Drawn: CM

Date: 11/09/2019

Checked: PR

Origin Point

Walking Journey Time

0 - 5 Minutes

5 - 7.5 Minutes

7.5 - 10 Minutes

Residential Parking ZonesResidential Parking Zones

BGFA Consortium

Indicative Site Boundary

Bedminster Green Framework Area...Bedminster area defined by ‘Draft Policy DS8: Central Bedminster which confirms: “Central Bedminster is proposed as an area of growth and regeneration

Documents