London Luton London’s Local Airport - Hitchin Forum · 46378017: London-Luton Airport Operations...

London Luton Airport

November 2012

46378017

Prepared for: London Luton Airport Operations Limited

London’s Local Airport - Planning Application

Transport Assessment

Prepared by:

URS Infrastructure and Environment Limited

UNITED KINGDOM & IRELAND

46378017: London-Luton Airport Operations Ltd

London’s Local Airport – Planning ApplicationTransport Assessment

BDRP0008 LLAOL 18MPPA TA FINAL 271112 27 November 2012

1

REVISION SCHEDULE

Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

1.0 09/11/12 DRAFT for Comment Mark Anslow

Technical Director

Jon Forni

Associate Director

Jon Forni

Associate Director

2.0 27/11/12 FINAL Mark Anslow

Technical Director

Jon Forni

Associate Director

Jon Forni

Associate Director

URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited URS House, Horne Lane Bedford MK40 1TS United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)1234 349 641 Fax: +44 (0)1234 216 268 www.ursglobal.com




2

Limitations

URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“URS”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of London-Luton Airport Operations Limited (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed dated 6 August 2012 and confirmed on 11 September 2012. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by URS. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed by the Client nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of URS.

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by URS has not been independently verified by URS, unless otherwise stated in the Report.

The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by URS in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The work described in this Report was undertaken between [insert date] and [insert date] and is based on the conditions encountered and the information available during the said period of time. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances.

Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available.

URS disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to URS’ attention after the date of the Report.

Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward-looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward-looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. URS specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report.

Where field investigations are carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to meet the stated objectives of the services. The results of any measurements taken may vary spatially or with time and further confirmatory measurements should be made after any significant delay in issuing this Report.

Copyright

© This Report is the copyright of URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.




3




4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 13

1.1 Background .................................................................... 13

1.2 Scope of Assessment.................................................... 13

1.3 Layout of Report ............................................................ 14

2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ........................................ 15

2.1 Development Location .................................................. 15

2.2 Proposed Development................................................. 15

2.3 Site Access..................................................................... 16

2.4 Study Area ...................................................................... 16

3 POLICY BACKGROUND ................................................ 17

3.1 Introduction .................................................................... 17

3.2 National Policy ............................................................... 17

3.3 Local Policy .................................................................... 18

3.4 Other Local Policies ...................................................... 19

3.5 London-Luton Airport Surface Access Strategy ........ 19

4 EXISTING SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORK .. 21

4.1 Introduction .................................................................... 21

4.2 Rail Network ................................................................... 21

4.3 Coach and Bus Network................................................ 22

4.4 Walking and Cycling Network ...................................... 24

5 ROAD ACCESS AND CAR PARKING FACILITIES ...... 26

5.1 Introduction .................................................................... 26

5.2 Central Terminal Area.................................................... 26

5.3 Local Access Roads ...................................................... 27

5.4 A505 Corridor ................................................................. 28

5.5 A1081 East Luton Corridor and M1 Junction 10......... 28

5.6 Airport Car Parking........................................................ 28

6 EXISTING ROAD DEMAND............................................ 31

6.1 Data Collection............................................................... 31

6.2 Link Flows on Immediate Airport Access Roads ....... 33

6.3 Other Corridor Link Flows ............................................ 40

6.4 Link Capacities............................................................... 41

6.5 Junction Flows............................................................... 42

6.6 Junction Performance ................................................... 42

6.7 LBC Baseline VISSIM Network ..................................... 43




5

6.8 LLAOL Baseline VISSIM Network................................. 45

6.9 LLAOL Model Validation ............................................... 46

6.10 Other Junctions ............................................................. 46

6.11 Summary of Baseline Network Performance.............. 48

7 ROAD SAFETY RECORD............................................... 50

7.1 Data Sources .................................................................. 50

7.2 Collision Records .......................................................... 50

7.3 Contributory Factors ..................................................... 54

7.4 Summary of Records..................................................... 54

8 CURRENT AND ANTICPATED NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS............................................................ 55

8.1 Introduction .................................................................... 55

8.2 Thameslink Programme ................................................ 55

8.3 Luton-Dunstable Busway.............................................. 56

8.4 Town Centre Improvements.......................................... 56

8.5 M1 Managed Motorway Scheme................................... 57

8.6 M1 Junction 10a ............................................................. 57

8.7 A5 – M1 Link Road ......................................................... 58

9 CURRENT AIRPORT TRAVEL DEMAND...................... 59

9.1 Introduction .................................................................... 59

9.2 Mode Split ....................................................................... 62

9.3 Rail Patronage................................................................ 63

9.4 Bus and Coach Patronage ............................................ 67

9.5 Passengers Travelling by Private Motor Vehicles...... 69

9.6 Vehicle Occupancy ........................................................ 74

9.7 Air Passenger Time Lags.............................................. 77

9.8 Staff Travel ..................................................................... 78

10 SCHEDULE OF LIKELY COMMITED DEVELOPMENT 80

10.1 Identified Development Traffic ..................................... 80

10.2 Wigmore Employment Area (Century Park) ................ 81

10.3 Traffic Associated with Committed Development...... 82

10.4 Committed Development Distribution ......................... 83

11 FUTURE AIRPORT TRAVEL DEMAND......................... 85

11.1 Trip Generation .............................................................. 85

11.2 Forecast Rail Patronage................................................ 87




6

11.3 Forecast Bus and Coach Patronage ............................ 90

11.4 Forecast Airport Traffic Demand.................................. 91

11.5 Trip Distribution ............................................................. 95

11.6 Future Car Parking Demand ......................................... 95

12 FUTURE HIGHWAY NETWORK ASSESSMENT .......... 99

12.1 Study Area ...................................................................... 99

12.2 Assessment Framework................................................ 99

12.3 Baseline Data ............................................................... 100

12.4 Assessment Years ....................................................... 101

12.5 Traffic Growth and Scenario Tests ............................ 101

12.6 LLAOL VISSIM Micro-Simulation Model .................... 103

12.7 Model Validation .......................................................... 103

12.8 LBC VISSIM Micro-Simulation Model......................... 103

12.9 Wider Network Impacts ............................................... 104

13 VISSIM NETWORK IMPACTS...................................... 105

13.1 Link Capacities............................................................. 105

13.2 VISSIM Results............................................................. 107

13.3 LBC VISSIM Model ....................................................... 108

13.4 Summary of 2029 Full Development Scenario results from LBC VISSIM model.............................................. 108

13.5 LLAOL VISSIM Model .................................................. 109

13.6 SCENARIO A – 2012 Base Year.................................. 110

13.7 SCENARIO DM – 2028, No Committed Development, No Airport Growth ............................................................. 110

13.8 SCENARIO B – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development ................................................................ 111

13.9 SCENARIO B(2) – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, Junction 5 Signals .............................. 112

13.10 SCENARIO B(3) – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, Junction 5 Signals, dualling of the A505 between Kimpton Road and Eaton Green Road....... 113

13.11 SCENARIO C – 2028, Background Traffic, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Full Mitigation................ 114

13.12 SCENARIO D – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Full Mitigation............................................................... 116

13.13 SCENARIO E – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Century Park, Full Mitigation ...................................... 116




7

13.14 Gipsy Lane Junction.................................................... 117

13.15 Summary Tables – Reported VISSIM Queue Lengths by Scenario ........................................................................ 118

13.16 Travel Times and Delays............................................. 120

14 WIDER NETWORK IMPACTS ...................................... 122

14.1 Summary of ARCADY Capacity Assessments ......... 122

14.2 SCENARIO DM: 2028 Future Year No Committed Development or Airport Growth ................................. 122

14.3 SCENARIO B – 2028 Future Year Background Traffic + Committed Development............................................. 123

14.4 SCENARIO C – Background Traffic (2028) + Airport Growth (2028) Only ...................................................... 125

14.5 SCENARIO D – Background + Airport Growth + Committed Development (2028) ................................. 126

14.6 SCENARIO E – Background + Airport Growth + Com. Dev. + Cent. Park (2028) .............................................. 127

14.7 Off-Site Impacts ........................................................... 129

15 SUMMARY OF HIGHWAY NETWORK IMPACTS....... 134 16 PROPOSED NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS BY LLAOL137

16.1 Introduction .................................................................. 137

16.2 Engineering Design ..................................................... 138

16.3 Airport Access Roads ................................................. 139

16.4 Road Safety Audit ........................................................ 140

16.5 Wider Network Improvements .................................... 142

17 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS................................ 143

17.1 Airport Demand for Travel .......................................... 143

17.2 Sustainable Future....................................................... 145

17.3 Car Parking................................................................... 145

17.4 Airport Access Roads ................................................. 146

17.5 M1 Motorway J10A....................................................... 147

17.6 A1081 and A505 Corridor ............................................ 148




8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Central Terminal Area (CTA) – Existing Landside Facilities................................Figure 2: LLA Two-Way Traffic Flow Airport Way – By Month of Year 2011................................................................................................................................Figure 3: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way Friday 15 July 2011 ................................................................................................Figure 4: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way Friday 9 March 2012................................................................................................Figure 5: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Percival Way (4-10 March 2012) ................................................................................................Figure 6: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way (4-10 March 2012) ................................................................................................Figure 7: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data A1081 ELC (4-10 March 2012) ................................................................................................Figure 8: Junctions 9 to 12 - Reported 2012 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues ................................................................................................................................Figure 9: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009 -2011: Month of the Year ................................................................................................................................Figure 10: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Day of Week ................................................................................................................................Figure 11: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Hour Commencing ................................................................................................Figure 12: Proposed Luton Town Centre Transport Scheme ................................Figure 13: LLA Total Annual Passengers (2000-2011)................................Figure 14: LLA Total Annual Passengers 2010 by Month and Flight Type................................................................................................................................Figure 15: Passenger Numbers by Day for August 2011 – Outbound/ Inbound Totals................................................................................................Figure 16: Passenger Check-in and Exit Time Profiles 2011 – Ave Monday to Friday................................................................................................Figure 17: LLA Passenger Surface Access Mode Share 2009 by County for Top Counties ................................................................................................Figure 18: ARUP Passenger Trip Distribution by Private Vehicles................................Figure 19: LLA Public Parking– INBOUND Vehicle Occupancy (04:00 - 09:00hrs) ................................................................................................................................Figure 20: LLA Public Parking– OUTBOUND Vehicle Occupancy (04:00 - 09:00hrs) ................................................................................................................................Figure 21: Start and Finish Times of Non-Shift Workers................................Figure 22: Start and Finish Times of Shift Workers ................................................................Figure 23: LBC Local Plan 2001-2011 – Proposals Map Extract for Wigmore Employment Area (Century Park)................................................................Figure 24: SCENARIO DM (Junctions 9 to 12) – 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues................................................................................................Figure 25: SCENARIO B (Junctions 9 to 12) 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues................................................................................................Figure 26: SCENARIO C (Junctions 9 to 12) 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues................................................................................................Figure 27: Junctions 9 to 12 – SCENARIO D - 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues................................................................................................Figure 28: Junctions 9 to 12 – SCENARIO E - 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues................................................................................................




9

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: First Capital Connect Service – Key Destinations ................................Table 2: East Midlands Train Services - Key Destinations ................................Table 3: Typical Approximate Journey Times to Major Destinations ................................Table 4: Local Bus Services................................................................................................Table 5: LLA Public Transport Hub - Bus & Coach Stand Locations/ Operators................................................................................................................................Table 6: On-Site Parking Spaces ASAS ................................................................Table 7: On-Site Parking Spaces May 2012 ................................................................Table 8: Off-Site Parking Spaces ................................................................Table 9: Summary of Base Manual Traffic Counts for 9 March 2012 ................................Table 10: Automatic Traffic Counter (ATC) Locations – 4 to 10 March 2012................................................................................................................................Table 11: Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Locations – Friday 9 March 2012 ................................................................................................Table 12: LLA Two-Way Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011................................................................................................................................Table 13: LLA Inbound to CTA Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011 ................................................................................................................................Table 14: LLA Outbound from CTA Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011 ................................................................................................Table 15: SITE 5 PERCIVAL WAY – AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012 ................................................................................................Table 16: SITE 2 AIRPORT WAY - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012 ................................................................................................Table 17: SITE 3 A1081 ELC - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012................................................................................................Table 18: SITES 4, 6, 7 & 8 - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012................................................................................................................................Table 19: Study Area Base Year Link Capacity Assessment ................................Table 20: M1 J10a AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00hrs) 2009 Count Data ................................Table 21: M1 J10a PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00hrs) 2008 Count Data ................................Table 22: A505 Airport Way/ Gipsy Lane AM and PM Peak Hour LBC VISSIM 2009 Base Data ................................................................................................Table 23: Summary of Base Year ARCADY Capacity Assessment ................................Table 24: Study Area Collisions by Severity 2009-2011................................Table 25: Study Area Personal Injuries by Severity 2009-2011 ................................Table 26: Study Area Personal Injuries by Casualty Class and Severity 2009-2011 ................................................................................................................................Table 27: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Lighting Conditions................................................................................................Table 28: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Junction Detail ................................................................................................Table 29: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Road Classification ................................................................................................Table 30: Passenger Surface Access Journey Origin by County 2009 (%) ................................................................................................................................Table 31: LLA Passenger Mode Share Trend 2005 - 2010 (%)................................Table 32: LLA Passenger Mode Share by Journey Purpose 2010 (%) ................................Table 33: LLAOL Baseline Rail Patronage Assessment for 19 August 2011................................................................................................................................Table 34: Morning Peak Demand and Capacity (2010) for London St Pancras ................................................................................................................................Table 35: Busiest Morning Peak Hour Growth Forecasts (Committed Schemes Only) ................................................................................................




10

Table 36: 2031 Morning Peak Busiest Hour Demand, Capacity, Route Utilisation And Gap Forecasts (Do-Minimum)................................................................Table 37: PTH Public Service Bus and Coach Demand - 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs)................................................................................................Table 38: Airport Shuttle Services Patronage – 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs) ................................................................................................................................Table 39: PTH Average Bus/ Coach Dwell Times - 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs) ................................................................................................Table 40: Bus Capacity Analysis – Friday 24 August 2012 ................................Table 41: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Planning Region (CAA Data 2010) ................................................................................................Table 42: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Key Sub Regions (CAA Data 2010) ................................................................................................Table 43: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Key Local Areas (CAA Data 2010) ................................................................................................Table 44: LLA Summary of Main Geographical Areas and Passenger Demand ................................................................................................................................Table 45: LLA 2010 Overall Passenger Distribution by Origin Route ................................Table 46: LLA Passenger Car Parks - Ave Vehicle Occupancy by Type (04:00 – 09:00hrs) ................................................................................................Table 47: LLA Passenger Car Parks – Mini Bus Occupancy (04:00 – 09:00hrs) ................................................................................................................................Table 48: LLA Staff Travel by Mode (%) ................................................................Table 49: Staff Catchment 2010 by Post Code Area and Work Pattern ................................Table 50: Identified Developments and Status ................................................................Table 51: Passenger and Staff 2028 - Future Mode Share ................................Table 52: LLAOL 2028 Rail Patronage Forecast for Peak Busy Day ................................Table 53: LLAOL 2028 Forecast Additional Rail Patronage 2011-2028................................Table 54: ‘Busy Day’ Additional Airport Rail Passengers by Direction of Travel.................................................................................................................................Table 55: Additional Airport Rail Passengers by Peak Hour and Origin/ Direction ................................................................................................................................Table 56: 18mppa Bus Capacity Analysis - Current Mode Share (32.5%) ................................................................................................................................Table 57: 18mppa Bus Capacity Analysis – ASAS Mode Share (40%)................................Table 58: LLAOL Airport 18mppa - TOTAL Traffic Demand Forecasts 2028 – INBOUND................................................................................................Table 59: LLAOL Airport 18mppa - TOTAL Traffic Demand Forecasts 2028 – OUTBOUND................................................................................................Table 60: Comparative Traffic Demand by hour - August 2012 and Busy Day 2028 ................................................................................................................................Table 61: Assumed Passenger Uplift Factor for Future Car Parking Requirements ................................................................................................Table 62: Interim Car Parking Allocation (includes use of easyLand) ................................Table 63: 2028 Proposed Car Parking Allocation with easyLand Multi-Storey Car Park ................................................................................................Table 64: 2028 Proposed Car Parking Allocation with Short Term Multi-storey Car Park................................................................................................Table 65: Schedule of Committed Development – Vehicle Trip Generation................................................................................................................................Table 66: Study Area Link Capacity Assessment - Base and 2028 Scenario B Conditions................................................................................................Table 67: Study Area Link Capacity Assessment - 2028 Scenario C & D Conditions................................................................................................................................




11

Table 68: Comparative Link Flow Change and Impact ................................Table 69: Comparison of Future Increase in Airport Traffic East of Gipsy Lane Junction ................................................................................................Table 70: LBC Modelled Queues at Gipsy Lane Junction with 2029 FDS (AM peak) ................................................................................................................................Table 71: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – AM 05:00-06:00hrs................................Table 72: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – AM 08:00-09:00hrs................................Table 73: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – PM 17:00-18:00hrs................................Table 74: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – PM 18:00-19:00hrs................................Table 75: SCENARIO DM – 2028 Future Year Do Minimum. No Future Airport Growth or Committed Development ................................................................Table 76: SCENARIO B – Background Traffic (2028) with Committed Development (ex. Century Park) ................................................................Table 77: SCENARIO C - Airport (2028) and Non-Airport (2028) Traffic, excluding All Committed Development ................................................................Table 78: SCENARIO D - Airport (2028) and Non-Airport (2028) traffic plus Committed Development (excluding Century Park) ................................Table 79: SCENARIO E - Airport and Non-Airport (2028) + Com. Dev. + Century Park................................................................................................Table 80: 2028 Forecast Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours ................................................................................................Table 81: 2012 August Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours ................................................................................................Table 82: Difference 2028 - 2012 Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours ................................................................................................Table 83: Forecast Impact A505 West of Hitchin................................................................Table 84: Airport Travel Contribution by Main Hertfordshire Districts................................Table 85: Forecast Additional Airport Traffic Impact Main Hertfordshire Districts................................................................................................................................Table 86: Forecast Additional Airport Traffic Impact M1 South ................................Table 87: Scenario D Junction Throughput and Airport Contribution 18mppa 2028................................................................................................Table 88: Scenario D - M1 J10A Throughput and Airport Contribution 18mppa 2028................................................................................................Table 89: Capacities of Urban Roads from TA79/99 ................................................................




12

APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Meeting Minutes

APPENDIX B: Figures

APPENDIX C: Link Traffic Data

APPENDIX D: Base Traffic Flow Diagrams

APPENDIX E: VISSIM Model Validation

APPENDIX F: Base Year Network Assessments

APPENDIX G: Collision Data

APPENDIX H: Committed Development Flows

APPENDIX I: Future Years: Traffic Flow Diagrams (with & without Development)

APPENDIX J: Future Year Scenario Testing Results

APPENDIX K: Proposed Airport Highway Improvements

APPENDIX L: Stage 1 Safety Audit & Designer’s Response

APPENDIX M: LLAL Junction Assessments

APPENDIX N: LLA Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017

APPENDIX O: Assessment Data CD




13

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.1.1 URS has been appointed by London Luton Airport Operations Limited (LLAOL) to prepare a Transport Assessment (TA) to support a planning application for proposed growth at the Airport for 18 million passengers per annum (mppa) between now and 2028. The Airport is an important asset for the local and regional economy and future expansion is considered vital to the local economy and its competiveness.

1.1.2 LLAOL is currently half-way through a thirty-year contract with London-Luton Airport Limited (LLAL)

1 that runs to 2031. Over the course of the contract to date LLAOL has seen the Airport

grow in terms of passenger numbers and has invested significantly to improve the Airport facilities.

1.1.3 In 2006, LLAOL prepared a draft masterplan for a large 30-million passenger airport, which involved a significant extension of the boundaries of the Airport. The 2006 masterplan was withdrawn and a revised masterplan document published for public consultation by LLAOL in March 2012. This considered a scheme to increase passenger throughput at the Airport to 16 million passengers per annum (mppa) by 2028 and was wholly contained within the Airport boundary.

1.1.4 In parallel, LLAL undertook a public consultation exercise on a masterplan for a separate scheme to increase the passenger throughput at the Airport to 18mppa by 2025, in advance of preparing evidence to support its own planning application.

1.1.5 LLAOL and LLAL have subsequently agreed that only one application should be submitted and that this detailed planning application should be submitted by LLAOL. It has also been agreed that the planning application should seek consent to improve passenger facilities and extend the capacity of the Airport to 18mppa.

1.1.6 A thorough review and extensive analysis of all the operations at the Airport drawing on work by both LLAOL and LLAL has identified some critical improvements that are needed to allow the Airport to continue to function even more efficiently during the next fifteen to twenty years. LLAOL is now planning to add further investment to deliver a new series of sustainable improvements to enhance the passenger experience and provide additional capacity.

1.1.7 One of the key components identified for current and future improvement is a focus on surface access arrangements that will deliver enhanced Airport access with improved legibility, safety and reduced congestion. Without improvement the Airport could cater for 12.4mppa; the proposals therefore include revised arrangements to address existing issues while satisfying forecast passenger demand for 18mppa.

1.1.8 The current development proposals have been designed to meet forecast needs and in doing so, take account of the physical capacity of the Airport site, airspace capacity and operational capacity.

1.2 Scope of Assessment

1.2.1 This TA forms part of the requisite Environmental Statement (ES). The scope of the earlier LLAOL’s 16mppa assessment was originally agreed with both Luton Borough Council (LBC) as local highway authority and also the Highways Agency (HA) given its responsibilities for the Motorway and trunk road network. Meetings were held with LBC at the URS Bedford office on Thursday 16 February 2012, with the HA meeting following on Tuesday 28 February 2012, at the HA Bedford office. The scope coincided with that agreed independently between the HA, LBC and consultants Arup as evidence to support LLAL’s 18mppa masterplan work, although URS widened the study area to include additional junctions for testing. .

1 A company wholly owned by Luton Borough Council.




14

1.2.2 The scope for an updated TA to reflect LLAOL’s proposals for 18mppa was reaffirmed with LBC at a meeting on 21 September 2012. Despite the increase in passenger numbers from the original 16mppa work, the revised forecasts do not materially alter previously agreed scope. The same is true in terms of previous agreements related to the use of an LBC VISSIM model to examine the impacts on the Highways Agency network at this time.

1.2.3 Minutes of Scoping Meetings with both organisations are included in APPENDIX A.

1.2.4 In the context of Airport operations the transportation requirements are normally considered in terms of Airside and Landside facilities. Airside includes those parts of the Airport directly involved in the arrival and departure of aircraft, the boundary of which is the security check, customs and passport control perimeter; Landside covers those areas that fall outside this controlled zone.

1.2.5 This TA sets out the scope, methodology, assumptions and results of the landside transport assessment.

1.3 Layout of Report

1.3.1 To follow this introduction:

• Chapter Two outlines the proposed development to include the site access arrangements and the extent of the assessment study area.

• Chapter Three sets the policy context with Chapter Four providing information on the existing sustainable transportation network. Chapter Five follows to outline the existing road access and car parking arrangements, supplemented by Chapter Six that outlines the existing road network demand. Chapter Seven provides collision analysis for the study area network to offer insight into the existing road safety record.

• Chapter Eight confirms network improvements that are either in the process of delivery or anticipated over the coming years by third parties. Current Airport travel demand is then discussed in Chapter Nine with Chapter Ten outlining the schedule of committed development in the area that is due to share the network, with the justification for the scale of forecast landside Airport transportation demand in Chapter Eleven. An explanation of the assessment framework from which to determine future network impacts follows in Chapter Twelve.

• Chapter Thirteen provides the results of various VISSIM micro-simulation network tests that demonstrate potential impacts both with and without the proposed Airport development, in association with Chapter Fourteen that examines the results of an assessment of ARCADY results for junctions on the wider network. This is followed by Chapter Fifteen that provides a Summary of the overall Network Impacts.

• Proposed network improvements associated with the Airport proposals are outlined in Chapter Sixteen and finally a summary and conclusions is provided in Chapter Seventeen.

1.3.2 Most of the detailed technical information scheme plans and supporting figures are provided as Appendices in a separate volume that accompanies this report. .




15

2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Development Location

2.1.1 The Airport is approximately 45km (28 miles) north of London and covers a site of some 245 hectares (605 acres) on the south eastern edge of the Borough of Luton. The Airport lies predominantly within the Unitary Authority of LBC, with small areas lying within Central Bedfordshire Council (CBC) and North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC). The planning application “Red Line” boundary lies predominantly within LBC. APPENDIX B Figure B 1 shows the general location of the Airport.

2.1.2 The Airport is primarily a passenger airport supporting a mix of principally low cost scheduled operators and charter services. There is a smaller proportion of general aviation, including business, and cargo operations. Around this core operation there are a number of directly or indirectly related operations and services, all of which occupy space within or near the site.

2.1.3 The airport possesses a single runway, running roughly east to west, with all the airport facilities found to the north of the runway. From APPENDIX B Figure B 2 it can be noted that Landside access to the terminal is along Airport Way, which passes the Airport’s Mid-Term Car Park (MTCP) and beneath a taxiway to feed a Public Transport Hub (PTH), Drop Off Zone (DOZ), taxi rank, Short Term Car Park (STCP) and some staff car parking in the vicinity of the Airport Terminal Building (ATB).

2.1.4 The single carriageway Airport Way link connects with A1081 East Luton Corridor (ELC) and also though to the A505 Vauxhall Way. These connections are managed by a roundabout junction adjacent to the Holiday Inn Express Hotel that also serves access to Percival Way and its adjoining business estate, while offering a route to the Airport’s Long-Term Car Parking (LTCP) and Car Hire facilities. ELC subsequently offers a connection through to the M1 Motorway at junction 10, while the A505 and subsequent connections link the Airport with other neighbouring areas and beyond to include Luton town centre, which is some 4.0km (2.5 miles) away.

2.2 Proposed Development

2.2.1 LLAOL’s proposals for the next phase of Luton Airport’s life will address current constraints and provide significant benefits to passengers and Airport businesses and provide for the anticipated development of the Airport for the next 15-20 years.

2.2.2 The proposals have been designed to be as efficient and effective as practicable and to use existing infrastructure to the fullest extent commensurate with this. There are four main components of the proposals:

• Dualling of the road from the Holiday Inn roundabout to the Central Terminal Area;

• Improvements to the public transport hub adjacent to the terminal;

• Improvements to the terminal building involving internal reorganisation and minor

extensions and building works;

• Construction of a new pier;

• Construction of a new taxiway parallel to Taxiway Delta;

• Taxiway extensions and rationalisation of aircraft parking areas with new stands

replacing and improving existing stands;

• Construction of a multi-storey car park on the western side of the existing Short Term

Car Park (STCP); and

• An extension to the Mid Term Car Park (MTCP).




16

2.2.3 In traffic and transportation terms, the proposed new built development is not envisaged to directly result in significant changes to the general pattern of travel both to and from the Airport, although numbers will inevitably increase. The development proposals will however serve to increase the passenger throughput of the Airport from the current level of some 9.5mppa

2 during 2011 to a projected throughput of 18mppa by 2028.

2.2.4 The purpose of the road improvement works is to improve access, legibility and safety and to reduce congestion on the road network around the Airport both now and for the future. Construction of the A1081 East Luton Corridor (ELC) has made substantial improvements to the access into the Airport. It has smoothed the flows of traffic from the M1 Motorway and provides an excellent ‘Gateway’ to the Airport. Since the London-Luton Airport Development Brief was adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) in 2001 however, there has been recognition of difficulties at some junctions around the Airport.

2.2.5 These difficulties have become more evident at the Holiday Inn roundabout, which has been recognised for some time as the first major bottleneck for some people travelling along the dualled part of the ELC into the Airport. The current road layout makes it impractical to provide reliable journey times on occasions for public and private vehicles alike that are seeking access to the Airport. Journey time reliability can be compromised, which is often a crucial factor as passengers are normally committed to rigid flight schedules.

2.2.6 LLAOL is proposing works to smooth flows around the CTA to address predicted future impacts at the Holiday Inn Roundabout and the approach roads to it, providing benefit for the travelling public that will satisfy proposals for future growth. The proposed arrangement for the PTH focussed on an arrangement whereby buses, taxis and authorised personnel will filter off the inbound carriageway to access the PTH, the Taxi Rank, Airport Servicing area and airport offices. All other public traffic will continue along a dedicated route around the perimeter of the existing STCP providing access and egress to an improved parking arrangement and Drop Off Zone (DOZ).

2.3 Site Access

2.3.1 Improved access will be achieved by dualling the entrance road and making improvements to the internal road layout forming the access route to the CTA.

2.3.2 The proposed road works will comprise improvement of Airport Way to a dual 2-lane 7.3 metre wide carriageway from the Holiday Inn Roundabout up to the Terminal. The proposed speed limit along this route will be 30 mph. The inbound carriageway will follow the alignment of the existing Airport Way aligned with a new outbound carriageway that will be constructed adjacent to the existing road on the southern side. This new section of carriageway will pass beneath Airport Taxiway Alpha through the southern portal of the existing bridge structure. No alterations to the existing structure are required to accommodate the new carriageway.

2.3.3 A new all movements traffic signal controlled junction will be provided along Airport Way to manage access to the MTCP. This new junction will be at the same location as the existing MTCP access junction. To cater for future demand the proposals also include revisions to the Holiday Inn roundabout with plans to replace the current arrangement with a new traffic signalised junction that will enable forecast traffic growth in future years.

2.4 Study Area

2.4.1 Details of the study area covered by the TA are confirmed later in Chapter 12, with a plan to indicate the extent included in APPENDIX B as Figure B 10.

2 Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017. London-Luton Airport




17

3 POLICY BACKGROUND

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 It is important that LLAOL’s proposals sit within a national and local policy framework. This section therefore summarises the policy background and documents considered during the preparation of this TA.

3.2 National Policy

3.2.1 The Coalition Government consulted on a new, sustainable framework for aviation in the UK. The consultation document, Developing a Sustainable Framework for UK Aviation: Scoping Document (March 2011), identified an urgent need for such a framework to guide the aviation industry in planning its investment and technological development in the short-, medium- and long-term. The government accepts the need for aviation to grow sustainably in support of the economy over the longer term, and aims to adopt a new framework for aviation by 2013.

3.2.2 The consultation document stated that aviation is an important element in the UK’s transport system, and should be seen in the context of the government’s vision for a greener transport system that acts as an engine for future growth. The Government’s overall goal for UK aviation also includes improving the passenger experience at Airports. The consultation exercise closed in October 2011 with a summary of responses published by the Department for Transport in July 2012

3.

3.2.3 The Government’s wider transport policy continues to reflect sustainability goals as well as its localism agenda. The local transport White Paper, ‘Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon: Making Sustainable Local Transport Happen’, sets out its vision for a transport system that is an engine for economic growth, but one that is also greener and safer and improves quality of life in communities. Local Transport Plans remain in place although with more flexibility available than before. Local Enterprise Partnerships will bring together business and civic leaders to set economic development strategy, although their future role in transport investment is currently unclear.

3.2.4 On 27 March 2012 the Coalition Government published its new National Planning Policy Framework

4, which will now guide the planning process for the years to come. The transport

related policy within the document is dealt with in Chapter 4 - Promoting sustainable transport, where it is recognised that transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives.

3.2.5 The framework recognises that:

• The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel, while acknowledging that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and that opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas;

• Encouragement should be given to solutions that support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion with Local Plans supporting a pattern of development that, where reasonable to do so, facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport with developments located and designed where practical to:

- Accommodate the efficient delivery of goods and supplies;

- Give priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, and have access to high quality

public transport facilities;

3 Developing a sustainable framework for UK Aviation: Scoping document - Summary of Responses (July

2012) DfT. 4 National Planning Policy Framework. March 2012 Department for Communities and Local Government.




18

- Create safe and secure layouts that minimise conflicts between traffic and cyclists

or pedestrians, avoiding street clutter and where appropriate establishing home

zones;

- Incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles; and

- Consider the needs of people with disabilities by all modes of transport.

• There should be collaboration between local authorities, neighbouring authorities and transport providers to develop strategies that provide viable infrastructure supporting sustainable development, including large scale facilities such as rail freight interchanges or the necessary transport investment required to support strategies for airport growth or other major generators of travel demand in their areas;

• Transport Statement or Transport Assessment and associated Travel Plans are required for all developments that generate significant amounts of movement;

• Plans are necessary to protect and exploit opportunities for the use of sustainable transport modes to ensure that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people;

• Improvements can cost-effectively limit the significant impacts of the development; and

• Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

3.2.6 With specific reference to planning for airports and airfields not subject to a separate national policy statement, the new framework points to the need for plans to take into account of their growth and role in serving business, leisure, training and emergency service needs. Plans should take account of this Framework as well as the principles set out in the relevant national policy statements and the Government Framework for UK Aviation.

3.3 Local Policy

3.3.1 The previous Local Plan 2001-2011 has now expired except for saved policies:

• Expired Local Plan Policies - ENV3, ENV11, ENV13, ENV15, ENV16, H8, LC8, T1, T4, T6. T7. T10, T11, U1, LLA3, IMP3

All other local plan policies have been saved and still apply

3.3.2 LBC is in the process of preparing a new Local Plan to cover the period 2011 to 2031. A six-week consultation took place between 25 June and 3 August 2012. LBC requested feedback and it is currently reviewing the responses received. In July, LLAOL submitted a representation setting out the strategic significance of the Airport to the borough, and encouraged LBC to take account of this in the Local Plan.

3.3.3 LLAOL considers that the Local Plan should include a policy that establishes the principle for further development at the Airport in a similar manner to that in the current adopted Local Plan (policy LLA1). The evidence supporting this planning application could be used to inform such a policy. This policy could then provide the basis for the preparation of a new Supplementary Planning Document (such as a new development brief), to provide an up to date local planning policy framework for the Airport.

3.3.4 LBC intends to publish a Pre-Deposit consultation in March 2013. The Airport will make further representations on LBC’s new Local Plan at this time.

Local Transport Plan 3

3.3.5 The Luton Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) was published in March 2011. It includes a long-term strategy for the period up to 2026 and an Implementation Plan covering the period to 2015.




19

3.3.6 The LTP’s vision for the long-term strategy involves providing an integrated, safe, accessible and more sustainable transport system that supports economic regeneration, prosperity and planned growth in the Luton conurbation. The vision also involves reducing unnecessary car use and carbon emissions, while enhancing the environment and improving the community’s health and quality of life.

3.3.7 To achieve that vision, the LTP has a number of aims, including:

“Supporting Luton’s growth as an international gateway in the context of both the growth of London Luton Airport and ease of access to the new Channel Tunnel Rail Link terminus at St Pancras”.

3.3.8 The main LTP priority at the strategic level is to improve east-west connectivity, particularly between Luton and Dunstable/ Houghton Regis but also on other strategic corridors depending on the timing of major developments. The main focus for managing congestion and reducing emissions will be through the intensive application of Smarter Choices measures to encourage modal shift from single-occupancy cars to more sustainable modes.

3.4 Other Local Policies

3.4.1 Although LLA is situated within the Borough of Luton, it adjoins Hertfordshire and also has close ties with Central Bedfordshire Council.

3.4.2 The Hertfordshire LTP5 places a high priority on making better use of the existing road

network rather than building new roads. Among the key challenges it sees are supporting economic development and housing growth, improving transport opportunities for all, achieving modal shift, enhancing the quality of life and environmental quality, and safety and security. The County Council will promote and where possible facilitate a modal shift of both Airport passengers and employees towards sustainable modes.

3.4.3 The Central Bedfordshire LTP6 refers to the council’s growth agenda to help Central

Bedfordshire develop as an economic powerhouse. The LTP seeks to create an integrated transport system which is safe, sustainable and accessible for all. It will manage the anticipated increase in travel demand in Central Bedfordshire by providing new capacity, making better use of existing provision, and reducing the need to travel. The LTP’s objectives include increasing the ease of access to employment by sustainable modes.

3.5 London-Luton Airport Surface Access Strategy

3.5.1 The 1998 transport White Paper, ‘A New Deal for Transport’, set out the requirement for each major Airport to establish an Airport Transport Forum (ATF) and prepare an Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS), with a view to reducing dependence on the private car by Airport passengers and employees. This led to the 1999 Guidance on Airport Transport Forums and Surface Access Strategies that set out advice on setting up ATFs, developing an ASAS and the importance of linking with local and regional planning policies and proposals. The coalition government has not endorsed or rejected the 1999 guidance, although the consultation document

7 states that community involvement in aviation issues, particularly local Airport

operations and impacts, is very important. It refers to ATFs and asks for respondents’ views on the current arrangements for ensuring sustainable surface access.

5 Local Transport Plan (LTP3) 2011-2031. Hertfordshire County Council.

6 Local Transport Plan 3: The Central Bedfordshire Council Transport Strategy - April 2011 to March 2026. Central

Bedfordshire Council 7 Developing a sustainable framework for UK Aviation: Scoping document - Summary of Responses (July 2012) DfT.




20

3.5.2 LLA has recently published its ASAS 2012-2017, which sets out challenging new targets that reflect the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Guidance on Air Transport Forums and Airport Surface Access Strategies (1999). The strategy has been subject to both stakeholder and wider public consultation and is an important consideration to guide future development. The strategy accords with guidance by setting out LLA’s targets and action plans for 2012-2017 to provide the foundation for travel behaviour and initiatives beyond that horizon when considering sustainable transportation planning to accommodate further passenger growth as part of this assessment.




21

4 EXISTING SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT NETWORK

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 LLAOL has undertaken extensive research on existing travel facilities and behaviour to inform its recent publication of the ASAS

8 discussed in the previous Chapter. It has been agreed with

both LBC and the HA that the data and information included in that document is a suitably robust platform to inform the Baseline position for this assessment. As a consequence it has been used to confirm service provision related to existing transport network facilities.

4.2 Rail Network

4.2.1 Access to the national rail network is available at Luton Airport Parkway station. This is situated on the Midland Mainline linking St Pancras International with the Midlands to a service schedule that is suited to travel by both air travellers and staff.

4.2.2 The station is served by East Midland Trains (EMT) and First Capital Connect (FCC), with connections to London, the South Coast, the Midlands and the North of England.

4.2.3 FCC operates the station with a rail-air shuttle bus provided to carry passengers between the station and the Airport. This is in the form of a bus service to include bendy-buses provided by First Group on behalf of FCC. Passengers can take advantage of through ticketing for this service, with convenient pick-up and drop-off directly outside the station entrance and the ability to request a stop along the route to the north of the Holiday Inn roundabout to access local hotels and other facilities in the vicinity. The shuttle provides a 10-minute service between 05:00hrs and midnight and is also scheduled to connect with all trains calling at Luton Airport Parkway overnight. The journey time to the Airport is approximately 5 minutes each-way with buses able to take advantage of the dedicated bus lane facilities along A1081 ELC discussed in 5.5.2 below.

4.2.4 FCC operates the Thameslink franchise and provides direct trains to destinations including:

• Bedford

• St Albans

• London St Pancras and

• Brighton

A summary of these services from Luton Airport Parkway Station is given in Table 1

Table 1: First Capital Connect Service – Key Destinations

Station Typical Weekday Frequency Typical Journey Time

Bedford 4 trains per hour 28 mins

St Albans 6 trains per hour 12 mins

London St Pancras 6 trains per hour 32 mins

Brighton 4 trains per hour 108 mins

Sutton 2 trains per hour 109 mins

Source: Table 4.3 London-Luton Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017

4.2.5 East Midlands Trains provide services between London St Pancras and stations in Yorkshire; some call at Luton Airport Parkway. Key destinations are summarised below, with typical journey times detailed in Table 2.

8 London-Luton Airport: Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017. LLAOL




22

Table 2: East Midlands Train Services - Key Destinations

Station Typical Weekday Frequency Typical Journey Time

Nottingham 1 train per hour 90 mins

Leicester 1 train per hour 60 mins

London St Pancras 1 train per hour 24 mins


4.2.6 While timetable changes have replaced a direct service to Derby with one for Nottingham, the journey is still practicable from Luton Airport Parkway although it now requires a change at Leicester. While not as direct or convenient, some passengers can also use the stopping opportunities offered by East Midland Trains at Luton Station, with onward travel to and from the Airport using local buses or taxi.

4.3 Coach and Bus Network

4.3.1 Bus and coach operations are a prominent feature of the CTA, stemming from the requirement for interchange with this important mode. Alongside coach and bus services servicing wider destinations, the dedicated CTA Pubic Transport Hub accommodates the demand for regular shuttle services to cater for journeys to external facilities such as Luton-Parkway railway station and the Airport’s Long, Medium and peripheral staff car parks plus those seeking the car hire facility. Airport employees are encouraged to travel around the Airport site on car park buses and the rail-air shuttle, which helps to reduce the need for the private car.

Coach Services

4.3.2 Green Line 757 provides an express coach link between the Airport and Central London, while easyBus offers a high frequency, low cost express bus service between Central London and LLA. easyBus coaches run 24-hours a day between the Airport and Central London. There are stops at Brent Cross, Finchley Road, Baker Street, Oxford Street/ Marble Arch and London Victoria. The easyBus LLA coaches and bus service are run as a commercial partnership with Greenline coaches so buses are both easyBus/ Greenline branded.

4.3.3 National Express services serve destinations across the UK to include major cities and Airports. Direct services from LLA include:

• Service 707 to Northampton.

• Service 737 to High Wycombe and Oxford.

• Service 767 to Leicester and Nottingham

• Service 777 to Coventry, Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

• Service 787 to Cambridge.

4.3.4 Many of these services call at the recently opened Milton Keynes Coachway. Regular direct services are also provided to:

• Stansted Airport;

• Heathrow Airport and;

• Gatwick Airport.

4.3.5 Stagecoach Route 99 operates an hourly express service between the Airport and Milton Keynes. The service operates seven days a week.

4.3.6 The range and frequency of these coach services is shown in Table 3, with National Express the dominant operator in terms of routes provided.




23

Table 3: Typical Approximate Journey Times to Major Destinations

Operator Destination Typical Weekday

Frequency Typical Journey Time (Minutes)

Green Line/ easyBus Central London 59 Services 80

Stagecoach Milton Keynes 16 Services 45

National Express Northampton 9 Services 75

National Express Cambridge 9 Services 95

National Express Oxford 8 Services 120

National Express High Wycombe 8 Services 75

National Express Leicester 9 Services 110

National Express Nottingham 9 Services 145

National Express Birmingham 11 Services 150

National Express Coventry 11 Services 100

National Express Stansted Airport 26 Services 90

National Express Heathrow Airport 19 Services 65

National Express Gatwick Airport 11 Services 145


Local Bus Services

4.3.7 Frequent local bus services are operated by Arriva (see Table 4) that allow direct access to Luton town centre, Aylesbury, Dunstable, Hitchin, Stevenage, Watford, St Albans and Harpenden. These are illustrated in APPENDIX B Figure B 3.

Table 4: Local Bus Services

Route Key Towns Served Operating Days Peak Weekday

Route Frequency

61 Aylesbury, Dunstable, Luton Mon-Sat 60 mins

100 Hitchin, Stevenage, Luton Mon-Sat 60 mins

321, 521 Watford, St Albans, Harpenden, Luton Mon-Sun 30 mins


4.3.8 Centrebus also provide other local bus services to Colwell Rise, Stopsley, Stevenage and Luton via Eaton Green Road, near the Airport

9. These are mainly used by Staff as an

alternative to the more strategic routes that focus on the terminal building. Centrebus also provide services from Luton town centre that provide access to Wigmore, Slip End, Markyate and Hemel Hempstead by interchanging with a route that travels between the Airport and the town centre

10. Additional local connections are available from Luton Airport Parkway station to

Hatfield, Stevenage and Capability Green.

9 Source: http://lutonbus.com/bustimes.aspx taken from LLA Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017

10 Source: http://lutonbus.com/bustimes.aspx taken from LLA Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017




24

4.3.9 Most bus and coach routes operate on a daily basis, although local bus routes 61 and 100 do not run on Sundays

11. Service frequencies tend to be similar on all days, although route 321 to

Watford has a reduced frequency on a Sunday12

. Service spans are also broadly similar each day, although some routes offer additional services around midnight on Sunday night/ Monday morning.

4.3.10 To accommodate the range of services the LLA Public Transport Hub is arranged to cater for the wide variety of services that the Airport operations demand. There are currently 13 bus stands with one layover space, which are allocated to specific functions shown in Table 5

Table 5: LLA Public Transport Hub - Bus & Coach Stand Locations/ Operators

Bay Number Services

1 Luton Airport Parkway Rail Shuttle

1a Staff/ Car Hire Shuttle

2 Long-Term Car Park Shuttle

3 Mid- Term Car Park Shuttle

4 - 6 National Express

7 Stagecoach Route 99

8 & 9 Arriva Local Bus Services

10 - 12 Greenline 757/ easyBus

- Coach Layover Space

4.3.11 The current 13 stands and single lay-over space are adequate in terms of stand capacity to cater for current bus operations. Delays for buses arriving and departing can occur on occasions due to tailbacks at the modified terminal roundabout.

4.3.12 In addition to the bus and coach facilities, licensed Hackney Carriages are available from the rank immediately outside the terminal.

4.4 Walking and Cycling Network

4.4.1 Walking is an option for some passengers, especially those lodging in the nearby Ibis Hotel or Holiday Inn, and a footway enclosed by pedestrian guard railing is offered on the north side of Airport Way leading up to the CTA to allow this and other journeys on foot. A section of footway is also available to link the Holiday Inn roundabout with a bus stop on the southern side of the road to the north, but otherwise there is no footway provision along this section. Potential distances linking the Airport with the surrounding area are shown by an Isochrone map included in APPENDIX B Figure B 4.

4.4.2 The opportunity to walk is also available to some staff living locally or those moving between the CTA and airport related facilities on the nearby Percival Way employment area, although Airport buses can be used for part of the journey. Footways are provided along each side of the carriageway through the employment area. Airport Way between the Holiday Inn roundabout and A505 Vauxhall Way supports a continuous footway along its northern flank and the same is true for A1081 ELC on the immediate approach to the Holiday Inn roundabout, where the facility is shared with cyclists.

11

Source: :http://www.arrivabus.co.uk/ServiceSearchResults.aspx?regid=1737&txt=Luton Airport taken from LLA Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017 12

Source: http://www.arrivabus.co.uk/serviceinformaiton.aspx?id=12755 taken from LLA Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017




25

4.4.3 Footways and zebra crossing facilities, supplemented by pedestrian guard railing where appropriate, channel pedestrian movements along suitable routes to the various facilities required at the CTA.

4.4.4 The A505 Vauxhall Way has been designed to function as a traffic corridor, with no direct frontage development. A footway along its western flank is provided for movement between Kimpton Road and Harrowden Road although for the remainder, a feature of the design is that footways are largely absent along its length, except in the vicinity of highway junctions where provision is made to link with the adjoining side-road footway network. A footbridge is provided to cross the A505 connecting Turners Road north with south, with another provided immediately north of Eaton Green Road/ Harrowden Road to aid crossing movements. Two other footbridges are found in association with the former Vauxhall Motors’ car park to link directly across to the works site.

4.4.5 While unlikely to be an option for most passengers, cycling is an option for employees. Cycling for work provides the opportunity for staff to schedule regular exercise into daily life. The routes currently available or proposed are published by LBC in its Luton Area Cycle Network Map (See APPENDIX B Figure B 5) to confirm the range of options available both now and likely for the future in the area.

4.4.6 National Cycle Route 6 (NCR6) provides a Core Route for the network. At a strategic level it passes through Watford, Luton, Milton Keynes, Northampton and further north as far as the Lake District.

4.4.7 At a local level it offers both on and off-road sections to provide a continuous route between Leighton Buzzard, Dunstable and Houghton Regis in the west before passing through Parkside, Leagrave, Limbury and Icknield to then cross New Bedford Road, Luton near Barnfield College. From here the route leads into Luton Town Centre to pass along Park Street to emerge alongside the A1081 to the north of Gipsy Lane adjacent to Luton Parkway Rail Station. An off-road route allows further onward travel along the Lower Harpenden Road to Harpenden some 4.0km (2.5 miles) away and beyond.

4.4.8 The A1081 ELC route from M1 J10a through to the Holiday Inn Roundabout is identified by LBC as an on-road route for cyclists with nearside cycle lanes and road markings to identify them alongside each direction of the dual-carriageway; this route is now operational. The LBC proposals would extend this to pass along Percival Way and Eaton Green Road, with cyclists sharing the carriageway with other traffic. This extension would offer access via Lalleford Road to other cycling connections within the Wigmore area of the town.

4.4.9 The Airport Way link between the Holiday Inn roundabout and Gipsy Lane via Kimpton Road is currently illustrated as a recommended on-road cycling route by LBC, with proposals for a traffic-free route identified to link with NCR6 at Park Street. This will allow connection to the town centre and further afield. Similar on-road routes are proposed and identified for Crawley Green Road and Hitchin Road with links along the local road network to join with the areas of Wigmore and Round Green/ Stopsley respectively.

4.4.10 At the Holiday Inn roundabout cycle signs and markings identify the off-road facilities available. Other proposals identified by LBC include a traffic free route alongside Airport Way between the Holiday Inn and A505 Vauxhall Road, with a similar route that travels from Gipsy Lane Traffic Signals alongside the northern carriageway of A1081 ELC to then drop down to the A505 Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road roundabout beneath. This facility also enables another connection with NCR6.




26

5 ROAD ACCESS AND CAR PARKING FACILITIES

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 LLA is well connected to the strategic highway network. M1 Junction 10 is only some 4.6km (2.9 miles) south west from the terminal building, connected via the A1081 ELC, which was completed in 2009 to facilitate growth in this corridor. To the East, the A505 provides connections to the A1 (M), M11 and East Anglia. Local access to the Airport is provided by the A6 to Bedford, A505 to Leighton Buzzard, Hitchin and Letchworth, the A1081 to Harpenden and St Albans and the B653 to Harpenden.

5.2 Central Terminal Area

5.2.1 The CTA north-east of Taxiway Alpha, is serviced by coaches, buses and taxis and provides vehicular and pedestrian access direct to the terminal entrance. It comprises key elements;

• Highway Access

• Public Transport Bus and Coach Hub

• Authorised Taxi and Priority Parking Area

• Drop Off Zone (DOZ)

• Short Term Car Parking (STCP) for passengers to include Disabled Parking Area

• Employee Parking

• A Fixed Base Operation (FBO) used by RSS Enterprises Ltd, a private business aviation

operator

• Easyland, which was formerly used by easyJet as offices but is now largely vacant.

5.2.2 These facilities are highlighted in Figure 1.

5.2.3 The CTA is effectively a cul-de-sac, with Airport Way entering as a single carriageway road that is currently subject to a 30mph speed limit. The road climbs steadily from its junction with A1081 ELC/ Percival Way roundabout adjacent to the Holiday Inn Express Hotel, passing through cutting before eventually levelling out at a substantial ‘teardrop’ feature that was formerly a roundabout. This is a prominent feature of the CTA frontage.

5.2.4 Prior to the cutting, Airport Way passes beneath Taxiway Alpha, which provides the appearance of a gateway for travellers entering the Terminal Complex.

5.2.5 The ‘teardrop’ at the CTA is relatively large and serves access to a number of distinct areas. On entering the area from Airport Way the second arm on its western flank is controlled by barriers and provides access to staff car parking adjacent to Navigation House, along the frontage of easyJet (Hanger 89) and to the air traffic control tower, which also accommodates parking for staff. It also links to a service road that connects with an area further north that is marked into bays and used on occasions for service and delivery vehicles. The third arm serves as the exit for all this area and is controlled by barriers.




27

Figure 1: Central Terminal Area (CTA) – Existing Landside Facilities

5.2.6 The fourth arm located to the north of the roundabout serves entry to the Public Transport Hub, with exit through the fifth arm. Immediately east, the sixth arm provides access and egress to the authorised Taxi and Priority Parking area plus the route for service vehicles to the Under-Croft beneath the terminal building. The seventh arm is positioned on the eastern flank of the roundabout and serves access to the DOZ, STCP and other facilities. On exit from the roundabout the route continues directly south, passing the DOZ entrance and then through a mini roundabout that serves access and egress from the STCP. Further south the route links to another large roundabout adjacent to an area know as easyLand and surrounding staff car parking plus to another operational building housing the RSS Enterprises Ltd Centre.

5.3 Local Access Roads

5.3.1 Airport Way provides general public road access to the CTA plus its immediate environs (See Appendix B Figure B2). From the terminal the road travels west, passing a simple T-junction serving the MTCP, to then connect with the A1081 at the ELC/ Airport Way/ Percival Way roundabout at the Holiday Inn. Bus stops on either side of the road are available between the MTCP access and the roundabout to serve facilities such as nearby hotels in this area. In common with neighbouring Percival Way, this section of Airport Way is not adopted public highway, with both roads forming a key part of the Airport’s internal access road arrangement.

5.3.2 Percival Way offers access around the west of the airside facilities where it joins to form a roundabout junction with Frank Lester Way and President Way further north. President Way continues eastwards to provide access to the Airport’s Long Term, Staff and Car Hire parking facilities. Frank Lester Way connects to the public highway at a three-arm roundabout with Eaton Green Road. Eaton Green Road then links with the A505 to the south west at Vauxhall Way and more local roads at Wigmore Lane, Tea Green and beyond to the north east.

Short Term

Car parking

Drop Off Zone

Hangar 89

Bus & Coach Terminal

Hub

Staff Car Park South

RSS Enterprises

Under-Croft Service Road

TERMINAL

Taxi-way Alpha

CTA Entrance

Taxi & Priority Parking

Staff Car Parking

Staff Car Parking

easyLand

Temporary DOZ Exit

Route




28

5.3.3 The connection with Eaton Green Road also provides two potential routes for connection with the A505 at Stopsley Green Roundabout further north. The first follows Lalleford Road, Crawley Green Road and then Ashcroft Road, while the second follows Wigmore Lane passing the ASDA superstore before crossing Crawley Green Road to then join with Ashcroft Road some 300m south east of Stopsley Green. The former is shorter and potentially quicker although Wigmore Lane is the more direct in terms of its characteristics and therefore tends to be the prime route for employees and others with local knowledge seeking the employment area, the Airport and beyond.

5.4 A505 Corridor

5.4.1 From the A1081 ELC/ Percival Way roundabout, Airport Way continues westwards as public highway to connect with the A505 at the Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road roundabout. To the north of the roundabout A505 Vauxhall Way follows a broadly north-south route to the west of the Airport, connecting with Eaton Green Road and later the Round Green area of Luton and the A505 through Stopsley to Hitchin and the A1. The A505 Kimpton Road arm travels west from the roundabout to link with Windmill Road and then Luton town centre. From here the A505 continues to central Dunstable where it joins the A5 Trunk Road.

5.4.2 The A505 Vauxhall Way/ Eaton Green Road junction is a five arm roundabout, also giving access to a minor road, Harrowden Road and to the main entrance and exit to a car park. Further north the A505 single carriageway forms a four-arm roundabout with Crawley Green Road and subsequently a three arm roundabout with Stopsley Way and the A5228 Hitchin Road. This roundabout marks the start of the A505 dual-carriageway leading out of the town. For general location details see Appendix B Figure B2.

5.5 A1081 East Luton Corridor and M1 Junction 10

5.5.1 Direct connection between Percival Way roundabout and the M1 motorway at Junction 10 is available by following the A1081 ELC. This dual carriageway route passes through a traffic signal control junction at Gipsy Lane and beneath a grade-separated junction serving Capability Green. It then connects to a roundabout at M1 junction 10a, which also serves London Road and routes into central Luton and the A1081 London Road towards Harpenden. A dual carriageway spur road from the roundabout then provides the final link to the motorway at M1 Junction 10.

5.5.2 The traffic signals at A1081/ Gipsy Lane cater for all turning movements with one notable exception. This involves a restriction that prevents A1081 westbound traffic turning right into Gipsy Lane. This manoeuvre is reserved for buses only heading for Luton Parkway Station, which is sited a short distance along Gipsy Lane some 2km (1 mile) from the Airport.

5.5.3 The westbound bus only facility complements a bus only link for eastbound buses that allows direct bus access between Parkway Station and the A1081 ELC eastbound carriageway. Once on ELC eastbound buses enjoy a section of bus lane that terminates some 0.5km (0.3 miles) south west of Percival Way roundabout.

5.5.4 Some 0.5km (0.3 miles) east of Gipsy Lane traffic signals the A1081 includes a grade separated junction. The A1081 mainline continues north to link with the A505 at the Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road/ Airport Way roundabout, while the A1081 link with the Airport is satisfied by a north-eastbound diverge and south-westbound merge facility. The single north-eastbound diverge lane subsequently merges with the Luton Parkway bus link with both passing over the A1081 – A505 Airport Way mainline carriageway below. For general location details see Appendix B Figure B2.

5.6 Airport Car Parking

LLA Car Parking

5.6.1 LLA operates three public car parks on site that are classified according to length of stay:




29

• Short-Term – Found close to the terminal building aimed towards passengers with short trip durations and for passenger pick-up.

• Mid-Term – Located on the main Airport Way approach to the Airport with passengers provided with a free shuttle bus service to the terminal. For some passengers the location is within reasonable walking distance of the terminal. The facility also includes a 30 minutes free Drop-Off/ Pick-Up area.

• Long-Term – Situated at the end of President’s Way to the North east of the Airport this is suitable for stays of three days or more with free Airport shuttle bus access provided.

5.6.2 A ‘Priority Parking’ valet service is also available for pre-booked customers adjacent to the taxi rank near the terminal. Parking bays for disabled people with Blue Badges are also provided within each car park.

5.6.3 Employee parking is catered for partly by London Luton Airport in communal employee car parks, or within the curtilage of individual business premises on the Airport, outside the Airport’s direct control.

5.6.4 The number of spaces allocated at each car park as detailed in the published ASAS is shown in Table 6.

Table 6: On-Site Parking Spaces ASAS

DURATION SPACES

Short-Term 1,556

Mid-Term 2,780

Long-Term 3,400

Passenger Total 7,736

Staff Total 3,835

OVERALL TOTAL 11,571

Source: Table 4.5 London-Luton Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017 & London-Luton Airport Annual Monitoring Report (2010)

5.6.5 Since the publication of the ASAS the level of parking has been revised due to operational changes, most notably the temporary scheme to improve flow through the DOZ that has utilised an area of the STCP, without detriment to satisfying the level of demand. A revised total is shown in Table 7.

Table 7: On-Site Parking Spaces May 2012

DURATION SPACES

Short-Term 1,059

Mid-Term 2,301

Long-Term 3,359

Passenger Total 6,719

Staff Total 3,835

OVERALL TOTAL 10,104

5.6.6 The Airport has extant permission for a further 980 long-term car parking spaces although this development has not yet commenced.




30

Private Off-Site Car Parking

5.6.7 In common with most UK Airports a number of Off-Site car parks supplement the official On-Site Airport sites. These are managed by independent operators who provide shuttle services to transport their customers to and from the Airport. The number of spaces formally approved as part of planning permissions for the various sites is detailed in Table 8.

Table 8: Off-Site Parking Spaces

PASSENGER SPACES

Airparks (Slip End) 3,510

Central Car Storage 216

Airport Carparkz 425

OVERALL TOTAL 4,151

Source: Table 4.6 London-Luton Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017 & London-Luton Airport Annual Monitoring Report (2010)




31

6 EXISTING ROAD DEMAND

6.1 Data Collection

6.1.1 The scope of the TA has been agreed with LBC and the HA as those routes most likely to be impacted, and this has influenced the extent of the study area and the data collection requirements.

6.1.2 The area included the East Luton Corridor (ELC) from Junction 10 of the M1 to the CTA inclusive, including all junctions thereon and also incorporating the Kimpton Road/ A505/ (old) Airport Way roundabout. Data for Junction 10 of the M1 to the Gipsy Lane junction inclusive was collated from existing reports compiled in relation to work by LBC on progressing improvements to M1 J10a; this is discussed in more detail in Section 12 where the network modelling assessment is confirmed. A plan to show the various elements and boundaries of the study area is provided in APPENDIX B as Figure B 10.

6.1.3 The A505, Eaton Green Road, Percival Way and Frank Lester Way routes were also incorporated as far as the following junctions:

• A505 Vauxhall Way / Eaton Green Road / Harrowden Road;

• Eaton Green Road / Frank Lester Way;

• Frank Lester Way / Percival Way / President Way.

Supplemented by four other junctions on the wider network:

• A505 Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road;

• A505 Stopsley Way/ A5228 Hitchin Road / A505 Vauxhall Way;

• A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road;

• Eaton Green Road / Wigmore Lane.

6.1.4 The scope of the TA has been agreed with LBC and the HA, which has influenced the extent of the study area and the data collection requirements. It is acknowledged that there are a number of other local routes available to residents, employees and others that could be used for Airport related travel, and the Airport does what it can to encourage people to use the main routes. It is not however practicable for this TA to make an assessment of every route available and it would be the responsibility of the Highway Authority to identify and promote controls if particular problems arise.

6.1.5 To determine the traffic volumes on the highway network on the main approach routes to the Airport, a series of traffic counts have been undertaken at key junctions within the study area where the potential for material impact as a result of expansion to 18mppa has been identified. The assessment focuses on the A1081 ELC approach from M1 Junction 10, the A505 approach entering Luton from the A1(M), to include its connection with the A1081.

6.1.6 The survey regime included the local network serving the employment area surrounding Percival Way and the adjoining Eaton Green Road. The junction counts recorded vehicle turning movements between the hours of 04:00 until 19:00hrs on Friday 9 March 2012 using high- mast video recording equipment. The videos were subsequently analysed to determine vehicle classifications and turning proportions.

6.1.7 The classified junction counts were supplemented by Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC) to monitor link flows. With one exception data was continuously recorded between Sunday 4 to Saturday 10 March 2012 to coincide with the fully classified survey data and broaden the detail in terms of daily and weekly traffic patterns. The exception was at ATC Site 8 A505 Beech Hill, which was in place 9 - 15 March 2012.




32

6.1.8 In addition ATC data from a permanent count located between the Holiday Inn roundabout and the MTCP along Airport Way was interrogated to provide data across the whole of 2011 and to supplement the March 2012 surveys.

6.1.9 Finally Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras (ANPR) were installed to record and match traffic movements at selected locations to identify traffic distribution surrounding the Airport, while also providing information on journey times to aid VISSIM model calibration.

6.1.10 The various data collection points used to inform the baseline position related to traffic flow and distribution for this assessment are shown in APPENDIX B Figure B 6.

6.1.11 The location of the various traffic counts is confirmed by reference to Table 9 for the series of MCC surveys, Table 10 for the ATCs and finally Table 11 for the ANPR camera locations.

Table 9: Summary of Base Manual Traffic Counts for 9 March 2012

SITE LOCATION TYPE DURATION

J1 Central Terminal Area Junction (CTA) Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J2 Short-Term Car Park Roundabout Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J3 Mid Term Car Park Access Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J4 A1081 ELC/ Airport Way/ Percival Way Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J5 A505 / Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Rd/ Airport Way RAB Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J6 Percival Way/ Frank Lester Way RAB Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J7 Eaton Green Rd/ Frank Lester Way RAB Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J8 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Eaton Green Rd/ Harrowden Rd Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J9 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Rd RAB Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J10 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way/ A5228 Hitchin Rd Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J11 A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Rd/ Ashcroft Way – Stopsley Green RAB

Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

J12 Eaton Green Rd/ Wigmore Lane/ Wigmore Place RAB Manual 04:00-19:00hrs

Table 10: Automatic Traffic Counter (ATC) Locations – 4 to 10 March 2012


Sunday 4 – Saturday 10 March 2012

1 Drop Off Zone (DOZ) Exit Lane ATC One Week

2 AIRPORT WAY between A505 and Percival Way ATC One Week

3 A1081 AIRPORT WAY (ELC) - SW of Holiday Inn RAB ATC One Week

4 A505 VAUXHALL WAY Immediately N of Kimpton Rd ATC One Week

5 PERCIVAL WAY between Prospect & Provost Way ATC One Week

6 EATON GREEN ROAD - E of Lalleford Road ATC One Week

7 A505 Vauxhall Way - Immediately N of Crawley Grn Rd ATC One Week

8 A505 Beech Hill - Immediately N of Butterfield Bus’ Pk ATC One Week

LLA AIRPORT APPROACH ROAD - W of Percival Way ATC Continuous




33

Table 11: Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Locations – Friday 9 March 2012


Friday 9 March 2012

1 Exit onto Percival Way from J8 (in Table 9) (South-Westbound)

ANPR 04:00-19:00hrs

2 Exit onto A505 Vauxhall Way from J6 (in Table 9) (Southbound)

ANPR 04:00-19:00hrs

3 Exit onto Old Airport Way from J5 (in Table 9) (eastbound)

ANPR 04:00-19:00hrs

4 Airport Way approach to J4 (in Table 9) (NEbound) no closer than immediately East of bridge over ELC

ANPR 04:00-19:00hrs

5 Exit onto LLA Approach Road (Eastbound) ANPR 04:00-19:00hrs

6.1.12 The ATC link data is presented in APPENDIX C.

6.2 Link Flows on Immediate Airport Access Roads

AIRPORT APPROACH ROAD (AIRPORT WAY)

6.2.1 The CTA and Airport Way serving it from the Holiday Inn roundabout is the main hub for Airport traffic demand. A permanent Automatic Traffic Count site (ATC) to monitor inbound and outbound traffic flows is located between the Holiday Inn roundabout and the entrance to the MTCP. From this source Figure 2 provides output to show details by month for traffic demand over the course of 2011 for the period week commencing 14 February 2011 - 2 January 2012 noting that data was not recorded for January and early February 2011, and December indicates a curious minimum value for December. The flows are identified in terms of minimum, average and maximum vehicle flows.

6.2.2 These data include all vehicle movements throughout each day travelling both to and from the CTA and include the activity generated by the MTCP; Shuttle buses and other movements between the MTCP and the CTA are excluded due to the location of the count site. Data from the same source by day of the week for 2011 follows in Table 12.




34

Figure 2: LLA Two-Way Traffic Flow Airport Way – By Month of Year 2011

Source: LLA Automatic Traffic Count located between Holiday Inn Roundabout and MTCP entrance. Note - Figures for January and early February 2011 not recorded due to ATC failure. ATC malfunction December 2011.

Table 12: LLA Two-Way Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011

DAY OF WEEK 2011 Daily Flow

Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

7-Day Ave

5-DAY AVE

MAXIMUM 26,742 25,455 26,754 27,280 27,356 22,924 26,261 26,574 25,965

AVERAGE 22,121 20,719 22,970 22,360 23,508 18,902 21,634 22,089 21,578

MINIMUM 17,459 15,132 16,931 15,411 18,107 13,744 1,904 17,694 17,299

Source: LLA Automatic Traffic Counter located between Holiday Inn Roundabout and MTCP entrance. Note - Figures for January 2011 not recorded due to counter failure.

6.2.3 From the 2011 figures, July, August and September emerge as the months generating the potential to accommodate the maximum daily demand; July also heads the list when considering the highest minimum. Friday emerges as the day attracting the highest flows across all categories, with values exceeding the corresponding five and seven-day daily averages; Flows are generally lower on a Saturday.

6.2.4 LLAOL report that the passenger numbers for late April/ early May in 2011 were unusually high. This followed a relatively late Easter combined with public holidays surrounding the Royal Wedding on 29 April, which offered the opportunity for many to enjoy an extended break.

6.2.5 Overall the count data does reveal that during the course of 2011 the average flows using the Airport approach road were in the region on of 21,500 per average weekday with slightly more at a little over 22,000 vehicles over the course of a seven day week. Inbound and outbound flows are confirmed by Table 13 and Table 14 respectively.




35

Table 13: LLA Inbound to CTA Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011

DAY OF WEEK (EASTBOUND) 2011 Daily Flow


7-Day Ave

5-Day Ave

MAXIMUM 13,311 12,610 13,271 13,370 13,518 11,309 12,973 13,148 12,838

AVERAGE 11,134 10,378 10,922 11,088 11,703 9,397 10,703 11,023 10,749

MINIMUM 8,715 7,563 8,518 8,297 9,607 6,994 931 8,797 8,559

Table 14: LLA Outbound from CTA Traffic Flows Airport Way – By Day of Week 2011

DAY OF WEEK (WESTBOUND) 2011 Daily Flow


7-Day Ave

5-Day Ave

MAXIMUM 13,533 12,845 13,602 13,910 13,838 11,615 13,373 13,426 13,127

AVERAGE 10,986 10,341 11,048 11,272 11,805 9,505 10,932 11,066 10,829

MINIMUM 8,435 7,569 8,117 7,114 8,324 6,439 973 8,895 8,526

6.2.6 The inbound and outbound flows are broadly balanced, which tends to reflect the enclosed nature of the road system surrounding the CTA, where vehicles entering tend to match those leaving. The operation of this link is therefore fundamental to the effective functioning of the transportation network serving the Airport. A study of the survey data for a busy Friday in July indicates readily identified AM, PM and an extended lunchtime peak hour. This is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way Friday 15 July 2011

Source: LLA Automatic Traffic Counter located between the Holiday Inn Roundabout and MTCP entrance.




36

6.2.7 The Airport has experienced congested roads on occasions approaching the CTA during the early morning hours (05:00-07:00hrs), which has been linked with demand attracted by the first flights of the day. The delay caused tailbacks through and beyond the Holiday Inn roundabout on all inbound approach roads. Operation of the DOZ was identified as influential in this respect and LLAOL has recently reorganised the access arrangements to improve journey time reliability.

6.2.8 Temporary improvements were installed during the autumn of 2011 to create a revised exit route for DOZ outbound traffic, which now circulates a portion of the STCP to avoid inbound DOZ traffic. The improvement has provided acknowledged benefits with reports of excessive delays and tailbacks significantly reduced.

6.2.9 With improved journey time reliability involving travel to and from the CTA it is likely that a number of drivers have refined their travel behaviour with renewed confidence that they are less likely to encounter delay on their journey. For comparison in this respect Figure 4 provides more recent data from the same source for Friday 9 March 2012 to reveal a marked variation from July 2011.

6.2.10 The 05:00-06:00hrs AM peak is an hour earlier than the 2011 figure and caters for slightly higher flows, although during the period 07:00-0900hrs they are significantly less. This suggests that drivers are now concentrated within an earlier time period in response to improved journey time reliability with the result that peak spreading is reduced. As a consequence the difference between the Airport AM peak and the highway network peak is likely to experience greater contrast than the 2011 figures imply.

6.2.11 It is also notable that there is relatively little variation in overall flows from 12:00hrs onwards, with a PM Peak covering broadly 16:00 to 19:00hrs at a little over 1,000 vehicles per hour. This broadly aligns with the preceding 12:00-15:00hrs period in terms of throughput.

Figure 4: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way Friday 9 March 2012




37

6.2.12 With peak hourly demand below 1,000 vehicles in any one direction the figures indicate that the existing single-carriageway should provide sufficient link capacity for the current circumstances, although junction capacity will be the main determinant in terms of effective throughput. Junction capacities are dealt with later in this report.

PERCIVAL WAY

6.2.13 For those travelling from the Holiday Inn roundabout the route to the LTCP, car hire and some staff car parking involves a journey along Percival Way. ATC data collated between Prospect Way and Provost Way during March 2012 in Figure 5 confirms Wednesday through to Friday as the busiest days, with fairly little variation in terms of total 2-way flows between them.

Figure 5: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Percival Way (4-10 March 2012)

6.2.14 Overall the traffic flow travelling northbound from the Holiday Inn roundabout tends to be slightly higher than in the opposite direction. Peak hours for Friday 9 March 2012 are shown in Table 15.




38

Table 15: SITE 5 PERCIVAL WAY – AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012

AM PEAK HOURS PM PEAK HOURS WEEKLY

AVERAGE PERCIVAL WAY

(Betw’n Prospect &

Provost Way)

05:0

0-0

6:0

0

06:0

0-0

7:0

0

07:0

0-0

8:0

0

08:0

0-0

9:0

0

16:0

0-1

7:0

0

17:0

0-1

8:0

0

18:0

0-1

9:0

0

5-Day 7-Day

NORTHBOUND 145 255 651 686 332 401 290 5,585 4,825

SOUTHBOUND 183 269 380 480 623 682 480 6,787 5,936

TOTAL 328 524 1,031 1,166 955 1,083 770 12,372 10,761

6.2.15 These data confirmed 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs as the respective AM and PM peak hours for this link. The balance of flow shows a bias towards northbound traffic in the AM and the reverse in the PM. This implies that the employment sites flanking this road plus an element of tidal through traffic are also influential when considering travel demand along this route.

AIRPORT WAY - Percival Way to A505 Vauxhall Way

6.2.16 The journey to and from the A505 Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road junction to the Holiday Inn roundabout involves a trip along Airport Way, which prior to the introduction of the A1081 ELC was the main route for access to the Airport. ATC data collated between the A505 Vauxhall way and the Holiday Inn during March 2012 in Figure 6 confirms Wednesday through to Friday as the busiest days, with fairly little variation in terms of total 2-way flows between them.

Figure 6: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data Airport Way (4-10 March 2012)




39

6.2.17 Overall the traffic flow travelling Southbound away from the Airport tends to be marginally higher than in the opposite direction, but generally the flows are reasonably balanced. Peak hours for Friday 9 March 2012 are shown in Table 16. In terms of total flow Wednesday was marginally the busiest day of the week, closely followed by Friday.

Table 16: SITE 2 AIRPORT WAY - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012


AVERAGE AIRPORT WAY

(Betw’n A505 & Percival Way)

05:0

0-0

6:0

0

06:0

0-0

7:0

0

07:0

0-0

8:0

0

08:0

0-0

9:0

0

16:0

0-1

7:0

0

17:0

0-1

8:0

0

18:0

0-1

9:0

0

5-Day 7-Day

NORTHBOUND 278 276 322 293 194 226 194 3,744 3,538

SOUTHBOUND 232 229 232 223 259 292 265 4,168 3,875

TOTAL 510 505 554 516 453 518 459 7,912 7,413

6.2.18 These data confirmed 07:00 – 08:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs as the respective AM and PM peak hours for the link. The balance of flow shows a bias towards northbound traffic travelling towards the Holiday Inn roundabout in the morning and the reverse in the evening.

A1081 AIRPORT WAY (East Luton Corridor)

6.2.19 The A1081 ELC provides a major corridor routes between the Airport and M1 J10a and J10. ATC data collated to the south west of the Holiday Inn roundabout during March 2012 in Figure 7 confirms Friday as the busiest day, followed by Wednesday and Thursday, which broadly match each other.

Figure 7: Daily Flow-Profile by Direction – ATC Data A1081 ELC (4-10 March 2012)




40

6.2.20 Overall the traffic flow travelling northbound towards the Holiday Inn roundabout tends to be higher than in the opposite direction. Peak hours for Friday 9 March 2012 are shown in Table 17.

Table 17: SITE 3 A1081 ELC - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012


AVERAGE A1081 ELC

(SW of Holiday Inn RAB )

05:0

0-0

6:0

0

06:0

0-0

7:0

0

07:0

0-0

8:0

0

08:0

0-0

9:0

0

16:0

0-1

7:0

0

17:0

0-1

8:0

0

18:0

0-1

9:0

0

5-Day 7-Day

NORTHBOUND 766 778 748 739 604 645 511 9,663 9,187

SOUTHBOUND 480 541 611 711 606 576 570 8,519 8,120

TOTAL 1,246 1,319 1,359 1,450 1,210 1,221 1,081 18,182 17,307

6.2.21 These data confirmed 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs as the respective AM and PM peak hours for this link. The balance of flow during the peak hours shows a bias towards northbound traffic heading towards the Airport in the AM but with a more equitable balance during the PM.

6.3 Other Corridor Link Flows

6.3.1 Link flows from the remaining ATC surveys sites are presented in Table 18 to confirm link flows along the A505 corridor between Kimpton Road and Hitchin Road (Sites 4 and 7), plus details for the A505 to the north of Butterfield Business Park (Site 8). Site 6 is also included to provide data for Eaton Green Road.




41

Table 18: SITES 4, 6, 7 & 8 - AM & PM Peak Hour Traffic Flows – Fri 9 March 2012


AVERAGE

LOCATION

05:0

0-0

6:0

0

06:0

0-0

7:0

0

07:0

0-0

8:0

0

08:0

0-0

9:0

0

16:0

0-1

7:0

0

17:0

0-1

8:0

0

18:0

0-1

9:0

0

5-Day 7-Day

Site 6: EATON GREEN ROAD (East of Lalleford Road)

EASTBOUND 67 132 241 436 849 952 686 7,707 6,995

WESTBOUND 192 436 756 775 479 527 477 7,627 6,960

TOTAL 259 568 997 1,211 1,328 1,479 1,163 15,334 13,955

Site 4: A505 VAUXHALL WAY (Immediately North of Kimpton Road)

NORTHBOUND 252 365 575 701 1,313 1,465 1,116 12,700 11,647

SOUTHBOUND 446 1,024 1,397 1,319 864 832 751 14,097 12,945

TOTAL 698 1,389 1,972 2,020 2,177 2,297 1,867 26,797 24,592

Site 7: A505 VAUXHALL WAY (Immediately North of Crawley Green Road)

NORTHBOUND 154 336 551 593 1,059 1,018 945 11,178 10,390

SOUTHBOUND 491 804 1,069 889 739 730 627 11,905 11,007

TOTAL 645 1,140 1,620 1,482 1,798 1,748 1,572 23,083 21,397

Site 8: A505 BEECH HILL (Immediately North of Butterfield Business Park)

NORTHBOUND 186 525 911 785 1,052 1,225 976 11,875 10,865

SOUTHBOUND 274 645 1,219 961 827 923 765 11,656 10,804

TOTAL 460 1,170 2,130 1,746 1,879 2,148 1,741 11,656 21,669

6.3.2 Peak hours vary between 07:00-08:00hrs and 08:00-09:00hrs depending on site location in the morning but is consistent across all sites at between 17:00-18:00hrs in the evening.

6.4 Link Capacities

6.4.1 As a guide to link capacities reference has been made to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

13 and guidance provide by

TA79/99 that provides design capacities concerned with

Urban All Purpose Roads (UAP). For design purposes TA79/99 suggests maximum one-way hourly traffic flows

14 based on the busiest direction of flow, as it assumes a 60/40 directional

split. The maximum one-way peak hour flows for the respective AM and PM periods have been compared with the guidance with the results present here as Table 19.

6.4.2 It is acknowledged that the A505 Beech Hill could be classed as a rural road of Dual All Purpose 2 (D2AP) in accordance with DMRB 5.1.3 TA 46/97, which provides guidance on Economic Assessment and Recommended Flow Ranges for New Rural Road Links. For the purposes of this exercise however it has been considered as an urban road to reflect its interaction with the Luton Urban area.

13

Volume 5 Section 1 Part 3 TA79/99 Amendment No1. Tables 2 (see Appendix Table G2) and 4; and

Volume 6 Section 2 Part 1 TD22/06 Figures 2/3 and 2/5, and Table 3/1a (see Appendix Table G3).

14 TA79/99 - Table 2 Capacities of Urban Roads. DMRB (5.1.3)




42

Table 19: Study Area Base Year Link Capacity Assessment

TA79/99 MAX PK HOUR FLOW

ONE DIRECTION SITE LOCATION

Width Type Cap AM PM

2 AIRPORT WAY (Between A505 & Percival Way)

7.3m UAP3 1,300 322 (NB) 292 (SB)

3 A1081 AIRPORT WAY (ELC) (SW of Holiday Inn roundabout)

2 x 7.3m

UAP1 3,600 778 (NB) 645 (NB)

4 A505 VAUXHALL WAY (N of Kimpton Road)

7.3m UAP3 1,300 1,397 (SB) 1,465 (NB)

5 PERCIVAL WAY (Between Prospect & Provost)

6.75m UAP4 900 686 (NB) 682 (SB)

6 EATON GREEN ROAD (East of Lalleford Road)

7.3m UAP3 1,300 756 (WB) 952 (WB)

7 A505 VAUXHALL WAY (Immed N Crawley Green Rd)

7.3m UAP2 1,470 1,069 (SB) 1,059 (NB)

8 A505 BEECH HILL (Immed N Butterfield Bus’ Park)

2 x 7.3m

UAP1 3,600 1,219 (SB) 1,225 (NB)

6.4.3 TA79/99 also recommends a further capacity reduction of 100 and 150 vehicles per hour for dual carriageways (per lane) and single carriageway (per carriageway) respectively where the heavy vehicle content falls within the range of 15-20%.

6.4.4 From Table 19 the A505 Vauxhall Way link to the north of Kimpton Road is the only link that currently reports as potentially over capacity. This occurs during the hours 07:00-08:00hrs in the morning (southbound) and 17:00-18:00hrs in the evening (Northbound). Faced with these conditions drivers could experience flow breakdown on occasions with increased journey times relative to free flow conditions. While flows are lower, the situation is also likely to continue over the course of the following hour in the morning and the preceding hour in the evening when traffic volumes from Table 18 are applied.

6.5 Junction Flows

6.5.1 While link flows provide one indication of network effectiveness, within urban areas it is usually the influence of junctions that govern the driving experience. For the purpose of assessing the operation of existing junctions Base AM and PM peak hour traffic flows from the MCC surveys discussed in 6.1 above were used. The network flows collated from this source are provided as a series of Network Diagrams in APPENDIX D.

6.6 Junction Performance

6.6.1 At an early scoping meeting discussed later in this report LBC confirmed that URS should rely on work associated with the validation and findings associated with a VISSIM micro-simulation model that was commissioned by the borough council to determine solutions for congestion at M1 J10a. The scope of the LBC VISSIM model includes M1 J10 through M1 J10a and onwards along the A1081 Airport Way corridor to include Gipsy Lane traffic signals and a short section beyond. The model has been used by LBC to determine potential junction improvements to cater for existing congestion and prepare for future growth. The scheme details are described in more detail in 8.6 below. URS has therefore relied on this extensive piece of work to inform both the baseline and future position related to this section of the A1081 and M1 approach corridor.




43

6.6.2 URS has developed a LLAOL VISSIM model to cover the study area surrounding the Airport. Amongst other roads, this extends along the A1081 Airport Way to coincide with the point where the LBC VISSIM model terminates. This is also discussed in more detail in Chapter 11 below, which outlines the VISSIM validation and scenario testing methodology used to determine network conditions both now and in the future. In terms of the baseline situation however, the results gathered from both models are presented here to complete the baseline picture. The separate LBC VISSIM and LLAOL VISSIM Model Validation reports are provided in APPENDIX E.

6.7 LBC Baseline VISSIM Network

6.7.1 The validated LBC VISSIM model was in effect used in place of surveys and wider modelling on the western section of the ELC, as it existed and its use for this assessment was approved by LBC and the HA. For baseline conditions on this western section, the base LBC model results have therefore been used, accepting (also with the agreement of LBC and the HA) that the 2009 base year is not as recent as that of the current CTA model base. This is explained in more detail in Section 12.8.

6.7.2 To validate the LBC VISSIM model a series of ATC, MCC and journey time and queue length surveys were carried out in June 2009, complemented by other data from 2008. The reported AM peak hour (08:00-09:00hrs) figures for M1 J10a are reproduced in Table 20. PM peak hour (17:00-18:00hrs) figures were based on similar data collected in 2008, with new queue length data supplied from 2009. The reported PM peak hour figures are reproduced in Table 21.

Table 20: M1 J10a AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00hrs) 2009 Count Data

APPROACH VEHICLES OBSERVED MAX QUEUE

(metres)

London Road North 720 575

Airport Way 1,346 130

London Road South 1,195 625

M1 Spur 1,812 55

TOTAL 5,073 -

Source: Table 4.7 and Table 4.9 - M1 J10A Junction Improvements LBC VISSIM Assessment Technical Note Draft Report Dec 2011

Table 21: M1 J10a PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00hrs) 2008 Count Data

APPROACH VEHICLES

OBSERVED AVE QUEUE (metres)

2008

OBSERVED MAX QUEUE (metres)

2009

London Road North 733 14 650

Airport Way 2,153 5 110

London Road South 765 153 120

M1 Spur 1,641 7 65

TOTAL 5,292 - -

Source: Table 4.26 - M1 J10A Junction Improvements LBC VISSIM Assessment Technical Note Draft Report Dec 2011




44

6.7.3 The figures show that over 5,000 vehicles passed through M1 J10a during both the AM and PM peak hours, with surveys indicating further demand evidenced by queues on all arms. Significant queues were observed on both the London Road approaches and the M1 Spur. It was concluded that demand exceeded capacity with the approximate capacity of the junction in both the AM and PM peak, given that the arrival and distribution of traffic flows, confirmed at just over 5,000 vehicles per hour.

6.7.4 While the maximum queue on the M1 Spur was not observed due to the use of automated technology for the 2009 AM queue survey, subsequent site observations that a slow moving platoon of traffic was a typical feature along the Spur in an eastbound direction; stretching back through Junction 10.

6.7.5 It was acknowledged that slow moving platoons were difficult to record accurately in an automated queue survey and therefore the observed figures were recognised as a significant underestimation of actual queuing on this arm. A similar issue arose where only average queue lengths were recorded for the PM peak related to the 2008 data and also with supplementary queue data from 2009.

6.7.6 The results of this baseline work do, however, confirm M1 J10a as a junction under stress, with a pattern of queuing that features a slow moving platoon on the M1 spur and significant delays on both London Road arms during peak periods. In addition a noted feature of the PM peak was slow moving queues extending up to the westbound merge slip road from Capability Green and beyond the merge taper along A1081 Airport Way. These are traits that remain in evidence and underline LBC’s proposals to promote improvements at the junction to address current capacity shortfalls and facilitate future development in the corridor.

6.7.7 The LBC work did not include observed queue lengths at the Gipsy Lane roundabout, but as all modelled turning flows satisfied the DMRB criteria, the model itself was considered adequate to provide a reasonable indication of the prevailing conditions through it. The general picture was that the junction worked well, with only transient queues at the traffic signals. The base data used for the LBC model in this case are provided in Table 22 for the morning and evening peak hours.

Table 22: A505 Airport Way/ Gipsy Lane AM and PM Peak Hour LBC VISSIM 2009 Base Data

AM PEAK PM PEAK APPROACH

(08:00 – 09:00hrs) (17:00-18:00hrs)

Gipsy Lane 811 624

Airport Way East 1,095 965

Airport Way West 858 1,659

TOTAL 2,764 3,247

Source: Table 4.26, 4.7 and Table 4.9 - M1 J10A Junction Improvements LBC VISSIM Assessment Technical Note Draft Report Dec 2011

6.7.8 In the AM peak, the model reported that transient queues build up as far as the first of the double mini-roundabouts on Gipsy Lane, and while they did not always clear after one signal cycle, they did not tend to build up in the longer term. This view was supported by site visits at the time. Transient queues on Airport Way were recorded as higher westbound, but again did not build up. However given the level of queuing on the M1 spur to the west of Junction 10a, which effectively meters the flow through to the Gipsy Lane junction, it was considered unlikely to be facing the full demand until such time as improvements to Junction 10a were made.




45

6.7.9 In the PM peak, all queues were transient, clearing after each cycle without building up, and the junction worked well. The queues on Gipsy Lane were shorter than those of the AM peak, while the higher queues on Airport Way were eastbound.

6.7.10 One caveat concerning this junction is that the mini-roundabout connecting Lower Harpenden Road to Gipsy Lane was not modelled, so the interaction of this junction with the wider network was ignored. The validation and anecdotal evidence reported in the validation report that supported the LBC VISSIM model indicated that its absence did not compromise the modelling of the Gipsy Lane junction itself and that it behaved realistically.

6.8 LLAOL Baseline VISSIM Network

6.8.1 The baseline conditions observed both on site and quantified through the survey data indicate a number of issues on the road network within the scope of the LLAOL VISSIM network. These issues can be identified as follows (the junction numbers refer to the plan APPENDIX B Figure B6):

Junction 3: Mid Term Car Park Access

6.8.2 The longest queue recorded at this junction during the survey was 20m, which is unlikely to represent more than approximately 4 vehicles. This represents a maximum queue length that occurs infrequently during the course of the day, suggesting there are no issues currently at this junction in the morning and evening peaks.

Junction 4: Percival Way Roundabout

6.8.3 Some slight congestion was recorded at this junction during peak times. Maximum queue lengths were recorded every 15 minutes and fluctuated between zero and 40m (approx 8 vehicles) between intervals. All queues at this junction are transient, and vary within this limit regularly during the peak hours, suggesting no serious problems as the congestion is light and the junction recovers without queues building up.

Junction 5: Kimpton Road Roundabout

6.8.4 Traffic was observed queuing on the southern approach to Kimpton Roundabout and tailing back towards the Airport Way flyover between 16:00 and 18:00. The extent of this queue was recorded as 130m during the survey and was also witnessed to stretch back almost onto the dual carriageway (approx 300m) on the following Friday evening. The queue dispersed by 18:00, which corresponds with the time during which lower flows were recorded through the junction. A particular concern is that the queue could tail back onto the dual carriageway, disrupting eastbound flows along it and endangering road users. This is the major issue with this junction, as queue lengths on the other approaches to the roundabout were recorded as between 0 and 45m.

Junction 6: A505 / Eaton Green Road Roundabout

6.8.5 Some slight congestion was recorded at this junction during peak times. Maximum queue lengths fluctuated between 0 and 55m, with minimal queuing on Harrowden Road and the IBC Vans exit due to the small amounts of traffic here. The longest queue (55m) was recorded in the PM peak on the southern approach to the junction (A505 northbound); however this queue was likely to have been a sudden fluctuation as the adjacent 15 minute intervals before and after saw a queue of only 5m and 10m respectively. A queue of 55m was also recorded on the Eaton Green Road approach in the AM peak, which again had dispersed by the following 15 minute interval. A queue of 40m was recorded on the northern approach to the junction (A505 southbound) which had also dispersed by the following 15 minute interval.




46

Junction 7: Eaton Green Road / Frank Lester Way Mini Roundabout

6.8.6 A queue of 70-85m was recorded on Frank Lester Way from 17:00-17:30 which is likely to be due to a sudden surge of staff leaving places of work, as there are a number of commercial premises on Percival Way. This queue dispersed to 30m in the following 15 minute interval, so did not cause any significant congestion. A queue of 60m was recorded on the eastern approach to Eaton Green Road between 07:30 and 07:45, which had dispersed by the end of the following 15 minute interval. The western approach on Eaton Green Road showed little queuing, with a maximum of 25m.

Junction 8: Percival Way / Frank Lester Way Mini Roundabout

6.8.7 Little queuing was recorded at this junction, with the exception of a transient 45m queue on Percival Way between 17:00 and 17:15, which corresponded with the queues recorded on Frank Lester Way. A 30m queue was recorded on Frank Lester Way between 08:15 and 08:45 that may well have been due to staff heading towards commercial premises on Percival Way.

CTA:

6.8.8 The survey data indicated that the CTA currently operates very well following the recent changes made to the DOZ and STCP access and egress arrangements.

6.9 LLAOL Model Validation

6.9.1 The LLAOL VISSIM model was validated to reflect these observed flows, queues and journey times. Of these, the comparisons of modelled and observed queues were important since, unlike flows, they form no part of the model input and as such provided an entirely independent measure of the model’s ability to replicate junction performance and capacity.

6.9.2 The model accurately represented the more significant queues such as the southern approach to Kimpton Road Roundabout, and also displayed a number of minimal fluctuating queues corresponding to those observed in the survey data.

6.9.3 With all the validation comparisons (flows, queues and journey times) the modelled values are averaged over ten ‘random seed’ runs (as explained later in Section 12.2). This smoothes out the random, day to day fluctuations that are observed, and ideally a similar average would be taken of observed flows to gauge better prevailing conditions. However, the model also replicated flows and travel times within acceptable DfT criteria – these, the results and a more detailed account of the validation can be found in Appendix E.

6.10 Other Junctions

6.10.1 Consideration has also been given to the operation of four other junctions that lie outside the LLAOL VISSIM model to determine current performance for both the AM and PM peak hours to help inform this assessment:

• Junction Site 9 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road/ Harrowden Road

• Junction Site 10 A505 Vauxhall Way/ A5228 Hitchin Road/ A505 Stopsley Way

• Junction Site 11 A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road

• Junction Site 12 Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Lane

6.10.2 The analysis was undertaken using ARCADY software with the results presented in APPENDIX F. ARCADY calculates queues and delays at roundabouts with the critical outputs the Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC). If the RFC is below 1.00 then the junction is operating within capacity and little or no queuing will result. To allow for a performance margin, a value of 0.85 is more typically considered to represent the desirable maximum value.




47

6.10.3 A summary of junction performance for the AM and PM peak hours tested is provided in Table 23 with the RFC value for the critical link included. For ease of reference the junctions are coded using a simple Red, Amber, Green method to highlight performance. Green denotes those with all approaches operating below the 0.85 desirable minimum, Amber reporting at least one approach with a value of between 0.85 and 1.00, with Red for those with at least one arm above 1.00.

Table 23: Summary of Base Year ARCADY Capacity Assessment

AM PM Site

Ref JUNCTION LOCATION

06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

9 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Rd/ Harrowden Rd

1.04 1.14 0.86

10 A505 Vauxhall Way/ A5228 Hitchin Rd/ A505 Stopsley Way

0.92

11 A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Rd/ Ashcroft Rd

0.96 0.87

12 Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Lane

0.88

6.10.4 The results indicate current over capacity issues at one of the four junctions tested. The critical links involved with all four junctions were:

• Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road - Crawley Green Road Eastern approach

• Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way - A5228 Hitchin Road approach

• Stopsley Way/ Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road - Ashcroft Road approach (AM) and A505 Stopsley Way approach (PM)

• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Western Approach

6.10.5 At all these junctions there were periods during the AM and PM peak hour testing periods that reported operations above the desirable 0.85 threshold to varying degrees, indicating junctions moving towards capacity in certain hours. The 08:00 to 09:00hrs and 17:00 to 18:00hrs periods indicate most stress and as a consequence the associated queues for these hours are shown for reference and comparison in Figure 8.




48

Figure 8: Junctions 9 to 12 - Reported 2012 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues

6.10.6 The reported queues are considered manageable at this time, which reflects the general picture, that most are currently able to offer some reserve capacity to cater for current traffic conditions reasonably effectively. There are however some signs of stress to include the reported queues on Crawley Green Road (E) approaching A505 Vauxhall Way, Ashcroft Road approaching A505 Stopsley Way and to a lesser degree A5228 Hitchin Road. The situation at Crawley Green Road appears to respond to recent junction alterations that have narrowed the approach lanes to the roundabout by using a combination of red surfacing and road markings; it is assumed this was completed as a safety remedial scheme to focus driver attention and behaviour, although the reduced carriageway width does impact on junction capacity.

6.10.7 These results and others can be directly compared with future conditions discussed in Section 14 later in this assessment; the Chart scale for Queue (vehicles) is consistent across all to allow direct comparison between this baseline and all future scenarios examined later in this report.

6.11 Summary of Baseline Network Performance

• M1 J10a already acknowledged as a junction under stress - LBC’s proposals for improvement should address current capacity failings to assist delivery of future development in the corridor. Details of these are discussed in Section 8.6 later in this report.

• A1081 Gipsy Lane traffic signals currently work relatively well with some transient queues extending as far as the first of the double mini-roundabouts on Gipsy Lane in the morning peak. Current level of queuing on the M1 spur west of Junction 10a is effectively holding flow through to the Gipsy Lane therefore the junction is unlikely to experience full demand until improvements to Junction 10a are in place.

• A505/ Kimpton Road roundabout is already showing signs of stress with large queues on the A1081 southern approach that can tail back towards and sometimes beyond the




49

Airport Way flyover between 16:00 and 18:00hrs. In future this queue could extend back onto the dual carriageway, disrupting eastbound flows and presenting a safety hazard.

• A505/ Eaton Green Road subject to some slight congestion during peak times, but queuing is transient and junction generally works satisfactorily in the base year.

• Some slight congestion during peak times at the Holiday Inn roundabout approaching the Airport and at other all other junctions within the LLAOL VISSIM model network. Generally the queues are all reasonably light and short lived suggesting the junctions are all operating reasonable well at present, with some short-lived spikes in demand on occasions.

• Eaton Green Road/ Frank Lester Way experiences queues in the afternoon on FLW north-westbound due to employees leaving work, but these die down quickly. It performs reasonably well for the AM and remaining PM peak hours. The adjacent junction of FLW with Percival Way also performs well, but is briefly adversely affected by the PM queues at Eaton Green Road as noted above.

• The CTA also currently appears to operate well in response to the recent temporary layout arrangements made to the DOZ and STCP access and egress arrangements. There are also no issues at the mid-term car park junction with the CTA approach.

• A505 Vauxhall Way link north of Kimpton Road indicates possible capacity failings for a time in both the morning and evening peak. Drivers could experience flow breakdown on occasions with increased journey times relative to free flow conditions.

• The remaining junctions examined along the A505 and at Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road are generally working well with only Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road reporting as over capacity (08:00-09:00hrs). All four junctions operate for some period above the desirable operational capacity threshold and some relatively minor queues form. These are however considered manageable at this time.




50

7 ROAD SAFETY RECORD

7.1 Data Sources

7.1.1 Accident data for the period 1st January 2009 to 31st December 2011 has been provided for LBC for the purposes of analysis. The analysis has focussed on accidents recorded along key links within the study area to include those within 50metres on all approaches to junctions. The area of search included:

• M1 J10 and adjoining corridor of the A1081 to the Airport;

• A505 corridor between A1018 and Ashcroft Road in Stopsley;

• Eaton Green Road between A505 and Wigmore Lane; and

• The Percival Way Employment Area.

7.1.2 For reference both the collision data and related mapping to illustrate locations and severity is included in APPENDIX G. Plans to show the collision locations by year and subsequently by severity are shown in APPENDIX B as Figure B 7 and Figure B 8 respectively.

7.2 Collision Records

7.2.1 From these data Table 24 indicates the overall collision record for the study area by accident severity. This is followed by Table 25 that confirms the number of personal injury casualties associated with these collisions.

Table 24: Study Area Collisions by Severity 2009-2011

SEVERITY YEAR

Fatal Serious Slight TOTAL

% of Total

2009 1 4 25 30 35.7%

2010 - 3 25 28 33.3%

2011 - 1 25 26 31.0%

TOTAL 1 8 75 84 100%

3yr Ave 0.3 2.6 25 28

% of Total 1.2% 9.5% 89.3% 100%

Table 25: Study Area Personal Injuries by Severity 2009-2011

SEVERITY YEAR


% of Total

2009 1 5 33 39 37.1%

2010 - 4 30 34 32.4%

2011 - 1 31 32 30.5%

TOTAL 1 10 94 105 100%

3yr Ave 0.3 3.3 31.3 35

% of Total 1.0% 9.5% 89.5% 100%




51

7.2.2 The records show an overall total of 84 collisions over the 3-year study period, with numbers falling since 2009. Nearly 90% were recorded as Slight injury collisions, with less than 10% as Serious and one recorded Fatality. From these collisions 105 personal injuries were confirmed, with the proportions in terms of severity almost matching those for the collision record. These data confirm an average of 28 collisions per year for the 3-year study period, with an average casualty rate of 1.25 casualties per collision.

7.2.3 Inspection of the casualty data from Table 26 reveals an overall total of 105 personal injuries over the period. Most involved vehicle drivers or riders and their passengers, with slight injuries the dominant outcome in all cases. Personal injuries involving pedestrians do not feature highly forming less than 7% of the overall total. The records do however confirm one fatality, which occurred at the CTA.

Table 26: Study Area Personal Injuries by Casualty Class and Severity 2009-2011

SEVERITY CASUALTY CLASS

Fatal Serious Slight TOTAL %

Driver or Rider - 7 72 79 72.2%

Pedestrian 1 1 5 7 6.7%

Vehicle or Pillion Passenger - - 19 19 18.1%

TOTAL 1 8 96 105 100%

7.2.4 Total collisions by month of the year are presented in Figure 9, with the highest proportion recorded during June. September, October and then December and March follow as the next most prevalent.

Figure 9: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009 -2011: Month of the Year

7.2.5 The 3-year casualty record plotted by day of the week in Figure 10 reveals relatively little variation between the weekdays with the possible exception of the totals recorded for a Monday, which is towards the slightly lower range recorded at the weekend.




52

Figure 10: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Day of Week

7.2.6 Collision details by time of day for the same period is shown in Figure 11 to verify that most morning collisions occur between 07:00 to 08:00hrs, with 8 collisions and 4 associated with the hours either side. In the evening the maximum is higher at 11 collisions recoded between 17:00 to 18:00hrs, with a symmetrical pattern of 9 and then 5 collisions for the hours either side.

Figure 11: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Hour Commencing

7.2.7 The record for lighting conditions shown in Table 27, verifies that some 69% of all the collisions occurred during daylight hours. While the remainder occurred during the hours of darkness, the records show that street lighting was in operation at the time of collision on nearly all occasions.




53

Table 27: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Lighting Conditions

ROAD LIGHTING TOTAL % of

TOTAL

Daylight: No Street Lighting 10

Daylight: Street Lights Present 47

Daylight: Street Lighting Unknown 1

69.0%

Dark: Street Lighting Present & Lit 24

Dark: Street Lighting Unknown 1

Dark: No Street Lighting 1

31.0%

TOTAL 84 100%

7.2.8 The collision records also confirm whether or not the event occurred in proximity to a junction, with details provided in Table 28. Nearly 60% were at roundabouts with some 27% occurring on a stretch of road more than 20m from a junction of any type.

Table 28: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Junction Detail

SEVERITY JUNCTION DETAIL


Mini roundabout - - 1 1

Not at or within 20m of junction - 5 18 23

Other junction - - 2 2

Private drive/ entrance 1 - 2 3

Roundabout - 3 45 48

Slip road - - 2 2

T /staggered junction - - 5 5

TOTAL 1 8 75 84

7.2.9 More detailed scrutiny of the roundabout records confirms that 19 of the total 48 roundabout collisions occurred in the vicinity of M1 J10a, with 9 each at A505 Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way/ A5228 Hitchin Road and A505 Stopsley Road/ Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road junctions. Of the remainder 3 were recorded for the A505 Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road/ Airport Way roundabout.

7.2.10 Examination of the road type shows that nearly 36% of the collisions (30) were recorded along the A505, with a further third (28) on the unclassified road network surrounding the main corridor routes. The A1081 accounted for some 24% of the remainder with the M1 and A5228 making up the balance.




54

Table 29: Study Area 3-Year Total Collision Record 2009-2011: Road Classification

SEVERITY ROAD CLASSIFICATION


M1 - - 5 5

A1081 including M1 J10A - 1 19 20

A505 - 5 25 30

A5228 - 1 - 1

Local Unclassified 1 1 26 28

TOTAL 1 8 75 84

7.2.11 The records also show that approaching 70% (58) of all collisions occurred when the road surface was dry, with nearly 29% (24) in the wet; snow and ice contributing to the remainder. Nearly 70% (66) were reported when the weather was fine, without high winds, with some 11% during a period where it was raining; again without high winds. Rain with high wind, fog or mist plus ‘other’ weather conditions were associated with the other nine collisions.

7.3 Contributory Factors

7.3.1 In terms of contributory factors nearly 31% (26) of all the collisions were reported as driver error (failing to look properly), especially at junctions. Of these 19 were attributed at roundabouts. Overall some 51% (43) of the collisions were attributed to driver error, with nearly 12% (10) linked to driver behaviour covering aggressive or careless driving and driver inexperience. A little over 8% (7) were recorded as anti-social (injudicious) with actions including failing to stop or give- way, making an illegal turn or travelling too fast for the conditions. The road environment was cited as a main causal factor in just over 9% (8) of the records to involve a slippery road through weather conditions or a substance deposited on the road surface. Nearly 6% (5) were classified with Driver/ Rider Impairment through distraction, use of mobile phone, fatigue or alcohol.

7.4 Summary of Records

7.4.1 Overall the 3-year accident records for 2009-2011 show that the number of reported collisions within the study area has been gradually falling over the years. In terms of personal injury most resulted in Slight casualties, with vehicle drivers at most risk followed by their passengers. Very few collisions involved pedestrians although this was not the case for the one recorded fatality.

7.4.2 June and September were the most eventful in terms of the potential for collisions, with most occurring on a weekday, around the morning peak and late afternoon and early evening. Most occur at junctions during daylight hours and in dry road conditions, fine weather and without evidence of strong winds. Collisions at junctions were the most common and in particular at roundabouts. In this respect the M1 J10A attracted particular attention, while the section of the A505 route passing through the study area headed the list in terms of the overall number of collisions. Driver error was reported as the main causal factor, especially at roundabouts, followed by careless driving, then by a variety of reasons involving anti-social driver actions or driver inexperience.




55

8 CURRENT AND ANTICPATED NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS

8.1 Introduction

8.1.1 A number of transport agencies and providers are investing in infrastructure improvements to provide additional network capacity in the Luton area to accommodate future growth and/ or address existing capacity issues. Known initiatives at this time are discussed in this chapter.

8.2 Thameslink Programme

8.2.1 The £6bn Thameslink Programme is currently in progress with the government’s commitment to complete reaffirmed in November 2010 to follow the announcement that the full programme, including the purchase of new trains, would go ahead. The Programme will offer more trains with greater capacity and better journeys for passengers on the Thameslink route running from Bedford to Brighton that passes north-south through central London. The programme includes:

• Longer trains: Maximum train length to increase from 8 to 12 carriages between 2011 and 2018.

• More trains per hour in Central London: Up to 24 trains per hour in each direction during the busiest periods, running at one every 2-3 minutes - from December 2018.

• Station Improvements: Major improvements by 2012 at Blackfriars, Farringdon and many other stations on the Thameslink route with redevelopment of London Bridge - by end of 2018.

• More destinations: An increase in cross-London destinations that can be reached without having to change trains - by end of 2018.

• New trains: By end of 2018 most if not all trains on the Thameslink route will be brand new and built to FCC specifications, with some planned to start in service in 2015.

• Quicker journeys: Improved journey times with more trains per hour to more destinations and fewer changes.

8.2.2 The aim is to relieve congestion across London’s transport network by allowing longer, more frequent trains to run to and through, the capital. It will also open up additional direct journey opportunities. Milestones to date have included:

• Completion of platform extension work at Luton-Airport Parkway in 2008.

• Closure of Moorgate branch in 2009, with additional cross-London services instead and Luton Airport Parkway gaining through services to Sevenoaks during peak periods.

• Introduction of 92 additional carriages for FCC services in 2009.

• The introduction of twelve-carriage trains in early December 2011 during peak periods on the Bedford to Brighton service; an increase from the previous maximum of eight carriages giving nearly 2,000 extra seats.

– Bedford to Brighton: (3x AM Peak 1x PM Peak)

– Brighton to Bedford: (1x AM Peak 3x PM Peak)

8.2.3 The plans for more twelve-carriage trains from 2015 will deliver a large amount of additional passenger capacity to and from Luton Airport Parkway and relieve existing crowding on trains. When standing space is included there will be a much greater capacity gain than the above increase in seats. This is due to the Thameslink and Crossrail train fleets, which are anticipated to be configured for relatively short distance commuting in the London suburbs, with over 1,700 people able to be accommodated on a Thameslink 12-car train at some 142 per carriage.




56

8.2.4 Completion of the programme in 2018 will allow all peak-period Bedford-Brighton services to call at London Bridge. This will improve the connections between Luton Airport Parkway and the developing area around London Bridge station. The final Thameslink Programme timetable is still under development, but is expected to bring an end to through-services between Luton and Wimbledon/ Sutton. Instead there will be through-services between Luton and Sevenoaks all day. By 2018 there will be more tains to more destinations including a connection to Crossrail services at Farringdon.

8.2.5 Beyond this the principal future crowding concern to London is forecast to relate to commuters on longer distance trains, with a forecast gap in 2031 of some 1,400 seats in the busiest peak hour. The London and South East Rail Utilisation Strategy

15 indicates that

“Consistent with the recommendations of the Network RUS: Electrification Strategy and the East Midlands RUS the recommended approach to reduce this gap and provide significant other benefits will be to replace the existing High Speed Train fleet used on the Midland Main Line (MML) with higher capacity IEP trains or similar, following on from High Speed Train replacement on the GWML and East Coast Main Line (ECML).

In the longer term there would be significant transfer of north – south demand from the MML to the North East leg of the proposed High Speed Rail network, assuming the construction of new stations to serve the East Midlands and Sheffield conurbations. This would therefore fully resolve the capacity gap on the MML.“

8.3 Luton-Dunstable Busway

8.3.1 The 'Luton to Dunstable Busway' (previously known as Translink) is a guided busway presently under construction that will link LLA and Houghton Regis via Dunstable. It is planned to open in Spring 2013 and expected cost of £83.5 million.

8.3.2 The busway will follow the disused former Dunstable Branch Lines that closed in 1989 to deliver fast and reliable connections to the town centres of Luton, Dunstable and Houghton Regis. Buses will be able to join and leave the Busway at key points, enabling them to penetrate the residential areas while being able to bypass prime areas of congestion on the existing road network. For details of the route see APPENDIX B Figure B 9.

8.3.3 The Core Route Plan includes LLA in the scheme linking it with Luton Station. The guided section of Busway will cease at the station, but buses will continue along a dedicated but unguided route connecting with the proposed development at Napier Park, before following an on-highway section directly up to the Airport terminal. The Busway offers enhanced travel opportunities by express bus, especially useful for local staff and others travelling both to and from the Airport.

8.4 Town Centre Improvements

8.4.1 Proposals for the Luton Town Centre Transport Scheme are being developed, which are considered by LBC to be fundamental to improving accessibility of the town centre by all modes. The scheme consists of three elements:

• Completion of the orbital road around the town centre;

• Provision of enhanced cross-modal interchange facilities at Luton Central railway station; and

• Improved circulation for buses, cycles and pedestrians around the north side of the town centre.

8.4.2 The scheme also supports major redevelopment planned by Network Rail to improve Luton Central railway station. See Figure 12.

15

London and South East Rail Utilisation Strategy (July 2011). Network Rail




57

Figure 12: Proposed Luton Town Centre Transport Scheme

8.4.3 During December 2011 the Government announced that funding of £15.85m had been awarded for completion of the inner ring road and associated road improvements within Luton town centre. In May 2012 LBC announced

16 that subject to final confirmation of funding by the

Department for Transport, work could start by late 2013 with completion by early 2015.

8.5 M1 Managed Motorway Scheme

8.5.1 The M1 Widening Junction 6A to Junction 10 scheme was constructed between 2006 and 2008. The M1 between Junction 6a and Junction 10 is now dual 4-lane motorway standard, with the layout of Junction 10 upgraded as a part of this scheme. For many years the Highways Agency has acknowledged the strategic need for further improvements to the M1 between Junctions 10 and 13 to cope with the high volume of traffic.

8.5.2 Originally scheduled for widening however to follow the successful trial of Managed Motorway methods, including Hard Shoulder Running (HSR) on the M42 in January 2009 the Secretary of State announced that the M1 Junctions 10-13 scheme would be taken forward as a HSR Scheme. This would be delivered within the existing highway boundary to remove the need to obtain additional land. To maximize the benefit of the HSR scheme Junctions 11 and 12 were also identified for improvement. Works commenced on the HSR element in December 2009 with the whole scheme scheduled for completion by Spring 2013.

8.6 M1 Junction 10a

8.6.1 The opening of the ELC in December 2008 has upgraded the A1081 and A505 to dual carriageway, provided a new bus-only road from Luton Parkway Station towards LLA and a new dual carriageway route between M1 J10a along Airport Way and passing Percival Way at the Holiday Inn roundabout to then lead directly to the Airport.

16

Source: http://www.luton.gov.uk/news/Pages/Luton-Town-Centre-Transport-Scheme-moves-another-step-closer-.aspx. Accessed Nov 2012.




58

8.6.2 Junction 10A is a large roundabout feeding ELC. £26.5 million of improvements have been identified to address existing issues and provide capacity for increased demand arising from proposed employment and housing growth served by the corridor. In this respect LBC anticipates some 6,900 jobs by 2015 and a further 6,500 by 2026.

8.6.3 To date LBC has secured £1 million of Growth Area Funding (GAF) from the Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) to develop the engineering and environmental design work for improvements at M1 Junction 10a. The aim of the scheme is to unlock development sites in Luton town centre and to the south and east of Luton and to help achieve this LBC has also allocated £500,000 to complete the statutory procedures.

8.6.4 The improvements would see removal of the existing Junction 10a roundabout and widening of the M1 Spur road to three lanes, with a continuous east-west carriageway between M1 J10a and A1081 Airport Way, with a speed limit of 50mph. The sections between M1 J10 to M1 J10a and M1 J10a to Capability Green Junction would be widened to three lanes in each direction with the nearside lane operating on a lane drop basis. Two lanes in each direction would pass through the new J10a Junction and the Capability Green Junction. Two new roundabouts are scheduled that will allow road users to join and leave London Road and the M1 Spur. London Road itself would be realigned, to pass under the M1 Spur, with pedestrian and cycle routes also provided.

8.6.5 During late October 2011 the Transport Secretary announced that the scheme was among 119 successful bids for the second round of awards from the Regional Growth Fund in response to the council’s application for £19.5 million to support improvements at the junction. The balance of funding from the government is assumed to come from third party contributions although it is now known that there is likely to be a shortfall.

8.6.6 An application was originally scheduled for submission to the National Infrastructure Planning Team at the Planning Inspectorate at the end of 2011, with a public hearing in spring 2012; but the submission was delayed. The proposed improvement scheme has now been submitted as a National Infrastructure Project and the Examination in Public into the proposals has commenced and is due to finish in May 2013. A decision is due in November 2013. Funding is in place for the scheme and it is supported by the Highways Agency. There is therefore a high level of confidence that this improvement will be delivered.

8.6.7 Building on the success of ELC the proposed upgrade of Junction 10A will complement and maximise the benefits to this strategic transport corridor in this area.

8.7 A5 – M1 Link Road

8.7.1 In addition to the managed Motorway Works on the M1 there are also proposals to construct a new Junction 11A on the M1 as part of a separate scheme, known as the A5-M1 Link (Dunstable Northern Bypass) to the north of Dunstable. This will remove most of the through traffic from the town centre. In addition, the opening of this Link Road in the period up to 2016 will aim to reduce traffic travelling to Junctions 11 and 12 from the local road network in Dunstable, Houghton Regis and surrounding areas.




59

9 CURRENT AIRPORT TRAVEL DEMAND

9.1 Introduction

9.1.1 London Luton Airport grew substantially in the mid 2000s when it was one of the fastest growing airports in the UK. This growth was helped by excellent connections to London and a strong local catchment with a high propensity for travel. The recent economic downturn led to passenger numbers falling from the peak of 10.2million passengers per year (mppa) in 2008 to 8.7mppa in 2010 (based on terminal passengers, i.e. excluding passengers transferring between flights). In 2011, passenger numbers were exceeded 9.5mppa (See Figure 13).

Figure 13: LLA Total Annual Passengers (2000-2011)

Sources: CAA Statistics (2000), table 10.3; 2011 by LLAOL, Terminal passengers only.

9.1.2 LLA is home to some of the largest European low cost airlines including easyJet, Ryanair, and Wizz Air alongside many other key scheduled and charter carriers including Aer Lingus Regional, Adria Airways, Blue Air, El Al, Flybe, Monarch (Charter and Scheduled) and Thomson. Nearly half of all aircraft movements at LLA in 2010 were operated by easyJet, followed by Wizz Air (18%) and Ryan Air (12%).

9.1.3 An extensive range of destinations are covered by all of these airlines to Ireland, Scotland and the rest of Europe, North Africa and the Middle east alongside long haul destinations reached via an ongoing flight (Johannesburg, Mumbai, Bangkok, Hong Kong and Beijing). Approximately 10% of passenger movements were domestic UK in 2010, nearly two thirds to/from Europe and a quarter to non-European countries

9.1.4 Of those passengers handled at LLA, 94% travelled on standard flights with four per cent on charter flights. The airport sees highest demand during the summer months, peaking in August 2010 with approximately 980,000 passengers (see Figure 14).




60

Figure 14: LLA Total Annual Passengers 2010 by Month and Flight Type

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

Jan Feb mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Month

Passengers

Scheduled

Charter

Sources: LLA Annual Monitoring report, 2010 Notes: Charter flights are flights in which the aircraft has been chartered or leased by a company, typically a tour operator. Scheduled flights are regular flights organised by the company which owns the aircraft.

9.1.5 Daily demand varies according to the time of year, although Friday generally represents the busiest day of the week in terms of passenger numbers. Figure 15 shows daily variation through a peak summer week in August.

Figure 15: Passenger Numbers by Day for August 2011 – Outbound/ Inbound Totals

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000


Pa

ss

en

ge

rs

Outbound - at check-in

Inbound - exiting term inal

Source: London Luton Airport, 2011 peak summer week. Notes: Outbound – at check in represents passengers on departing flights, requiring ‘inbound’ surface access. Inbound – exiting terminal represents passengers requiring ‘outbound’ surface access




61

9.1.6 The busiest time of day at the Airport in terms of passenger demand is currently well before the typical morning peak, as passengers arrive to check in some two to three hours before take-off (See Figure 16 followed by a more detailed explanation in 9.7 below). The bulk of passengers in the morning begin exiting the terminal from 7am as the earlier morning flights arrive, and continue to do so steadily throughout the day, peaking between 2 and 3pm.

Figure 16: Passenger Check-in and Exit Time Profiles 2011 – Ave Monday to Friday

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Hour starting

Passengers

Outbound - at check-in

Inbound - exiting term inal

Source: London Luton Airport, 2011 peak summer week. Notes: Outbound – at check in represents passengers on departing flights, requiring ‘inbound’ surface access. Inbound – exiting terminal represents passengers requiring ‘outbound’ surface access Passenger Scale on Chart removed as data commercially sensitive.

9.1.7 Looking at journeys across all modes (See Table 30) well over one-third of all passengers travel to or from Greater London (38%), with a large proportion (over half) travelling by train, bus or coach. Approximately a third travel from within Bedfordshire (9.5%), or nearby Hertfordshire (13%) and Buckinghamshire (7.4%). This leaves approximately one in three passengers travelling from further afield (see Figure 17).

Table 30: Passenger Surface Access Journey Origin by County 2009 (%)

COUNTY 2009 COUNTY 2009

Greater London 37.7% Oxfordshire 2.8%

Hertfordshire 12.8% Essex 2.2%

Bedfordshire 9.5% Berkshire 2.1%

Buckinghamshire 7.4% West Midlands 1.7%

Northamptonshire 4.2% Other counties 15.9%

Cambridgeshire 3.7%

TOTAL 100%

Source: CAA Passenger Surveys (2009)




62

Figure 17: LLA Passenger Surface Access Mode Share 2009 by County for Top Counties

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gre

ate

r L

on

do

n

He

rtfo

rdsh

ire

Be

dfo

rdsh

ire

Bu

ckin

gh

am

sh

ire

No

rth

am

pto

nsh

ire

Ca

mb

rid

ge

sh

ire

Oxfo

rdsh

ire

Esse

x

Be

rksh

ire

We

st M

idla

nd

s

Other

Buses / Coaches

Train

Taxi / Minic ab

Car (on- site parking)

Car (off- site parking)

Car (drop- off)

Sources: CAA Statistics (2000), table 10.3; 2011 by LLAOL, Terminal passengers only.

9.2 Mode Split

9.2.1 The Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) Passenger Survey programme provides data on passengers’ mode of travel to the Airport as well as demographic data. The survey data includes weightings that match the survey population with the volume of passengers on each air route. Table 31 shows that one third of passengers arrive or depart by public transport (rail or bus/ coach).

9.2.2 The share of passengers using public transport has risen significantly over the last seven years with most of the growth coming in bus/coach travel with a corresponding reduction in on-site parking demand.

Table 31: LLA Passenger Mode Share Trend 2005 - 2010 (%)

MODE 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Car (drop-off) 28.9 27.9 24.7 26.2 28.3 26.5

Car (off-site parking) 8.5 7.6 8.1 8.6 8.3 9.3

Car (on-site parking) 21.5 20.8 22.8 18.4 18.7 15.1

Taxi 12.5 13.8 14.9 13.7 13.5 16.2

Train 17.8 17.2 17.0 19.1 16.6 17.2

Bus / Coach 10.3 12.5 12.0 13.7 14.1 15.3

Other 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.4

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Source: CAA Passenger Surveys (2005 – 2010). Weighted data.




63

9.2.3 Mode choice depends greatly on the purpose of the journey and by whether or not the passenger is a UK or non-UK resident. Business passengers are less likely to travel by public transport and likely to travel by taxi or by car and park on site (Table 32). Leisure travellers are more likely to be dropped-off, park off-site and are also more likely to travel by rail, bus or coach.

Table 32: LLA Passenger Mode Share by Journey Purpose 2010 (%)

BUSINESS % LEISURE %

MODE Non-UK

UK All Non-UK

UK All ALL

Car (drop-off) 17.2 13.8 14.7 33.6 27.4 29.2 26.5

Car (off-site parking) 0.5 5.1 3.9 0.4 14.6 10.5 9.3

Car (on-site parking) 12.9 38.7 32.0 7.1 12.8 11.2 15.1

Taxi 21.5 22.3 22.1 9.2 17.2 14.9 16.2

Train 25.4 15.1 17.8 23.0 14.7 17.1 17.2

Bus / Coach 21.2 4.5 8.8 26.5 12.9 16.8 15.3

Other 1.3 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4

ALL 4.9 13.9 18.8 23.6 57.6 81.2 100.0

Source: CAA Passenger Surveys (2005 – 2010). Weighted data.

9.2.4 LLA has achieved a strong public transport mode share in comparison to other airports of its size in the UK. This can be considered particularly successful given the Airport’s widely spread passenger base and its location. This includes close proximity to the M1 corridor, which facilitates car travel alongside the East Luton Corridor, and the fact that rail access requires a change onto a shuttle bus at Luton Parkway station rather than direct access into the airport terminal area.

9.2.5 Mode share varies by catchment area, which in turn reflects the nature of passengers, journey purpose (UK business/leisure or non-UK/business/leisure) and the transport options available from each area. For example:

• Greater London has a mode share of 55%, reflecting strong bus/coach and train

links and the contribution of non-UK leisure travellers to this catchment.

• Taxi/ minicabs are used predominantly by those travelling from Bedfordshire and

Hertfordshire (over 20%).

• The percentage of Drop-Off is also higher from these counties but also from

Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire totalling in excess or close to 40% of all

journeys.

• Public transport’s mode share is strong in the West Midlands (37%) and

Oxfordshire (29%) due almost entirely to the coach services to and from

Birmingham/ Coventry and Oxford respectively.

9.3 Rail Patronage

9.3.1 As a baseline LLAOL has provided hourly rail patronage figures from its capacity model based on flight data for a peak day on 19 August 2011. The model translates inbound and outbound flights through CAA data profiles to provide an hourly profile of passengers entering and leaving the Airport that rely on Rail as their mode of choice for landside travel.




64

Table 33: LLAOL Baseline Rail Patronage Assessment for 19 August 2011

Inbound Outbound Hour Comm Business Leisure TOTAL Business Leisure Total

Overall TOTAL

00:00 1 5 6 16 160 177 183

01:00 0 1 1 5 95 100 101

02:00 3 16 19 3 80 84 103

03:00 19 98 117 1 19 20 137

04:00 24 129 152 0 1 1 153

05:00 1 31 32 0 0 0 32

06:00 49 230 279 0 0 0 279

07:00 33 154 186 40 182 222 408

08:00 32 192 224 85 368 454 678

09:00 12 111 123 33 88 121 244

10:00 16 108 124 30 68 98 222

11:00 28 127 154 26 111 136 290

12:00 33 141 174 11 137 148 322

13:00 30 137 167 20 139 159 326

14:00 20 119 139 26 153 179 318

15:00 16 89 105 30 139 169 274

16:00 55 202 257 15 92 107 364

17:00 80 285 365 12 78 90 455

18:00 69 281 351 0 0 0 351

19:00 14 49 63 51 136 187 250

20:00 7 46 53 34 115 149 202

21:00 2 47 49 23 111 135 184

22:00 1 32 33 41 123 164 197

23:00 2 18 20 43 176 219 239

TOTAL 545 2,647 3,193 548 2,571 3,120 6,312

9.3.2 From the table the peak hourly rail demand period can be recognised as 08:00-09:00hrs with a total of 678 passengers; 224 inbound and 454 outbound. Accepting the time lag to travel between the Airport and the Rail Station, many of the outbound travellers around this time would share their train journey with other travellers using the line towards London.

9.3.3 One key indicator in terms of the operation of the rail network serving the Airport relates to the capacity of the railway line to London St Pancras. The baseline position at St Pancras is presented in Table 4.2 of the London and South East Rail Utilisation Strategy (subsequently referred to here as the RUS) and an extract is reproduced in relation to London St Pancras as Table 34 below.




65

9.3.4 The data presents the capacity and demand baseline for this key route corridor, together with indicators of current overcrowding for each in the morning peak period. The information is based upon on-train loadings measured in autumn 2010 and the anticipation that capacity improvements for peak inbound morning movements to London will satisfy the busiest demand at other times.

Table 34: Morning Peak Demand and Capacity (2010) for London St Pancras

3 Hour Weekday Morning Peak Busiest 1 Hour in Morning Peak

LONDON ST PANCRAS

SERVICE GROUP

To

tal

Ca

pa

cit

y

To

tal

De

ma

nd

To

tal

De

ma

nd

/ T

ota

l C

ap

ac

ity

Ov

erc

row

din

g

Ind

ica

tor

To

tal

Ca

pa

cit

y

To

tal

De

ma

nd

To

tal

De

ma

nd

/ T

ota

l C

ap

ac

ity

Ov

erc

row

din

g

Ind

ica

tor

Thameslink MML 27,900 19,600 70% 0% 11,700 9,900 85% 0%

MML Long Distance 5,500 4,400 80% 0% 2,900 2,300 79% 2%

High Speed 1 (domestic) 13,800 5,700 41% 0% 5,700 2,500 44% 0%

TOTAL 47,200 29,700 - - 20,300 14,700 - -

Source: Table 4.2 London and South East RUS. Network Rail (July 2011)

9.3.5 Assuming that the highest hour value of 454 outbound Airport passengers travelled during the morning peak demand period and accepting the differing years, the Airport passenger element would represent some 4.6% of the total Thameslink demand at St Pancras and therefore a relatively small proportion of the total Rail patronage during this busy time. In reality these Airport passengers would divide their journey between travel north and south along the line, with some further sub-division as some passengers could also use the East Midlands Train service for some journeys.

9.3.6 The 2010 figures indicated capacity on the line in terms of the 3 hour weekday morning peak, although issues were highlighted in relation to the Midland Mainline for the busiest hour into London. As noted earlier in 8.2 above the recent and continuing introduction of longer trains on the Thameslink line, with more planned from 2015 that will relive issues of overcrowding.

9.3.7 The forecast growth for the corridor in passengers for the busiest morning peak hour into London is subsequently confirmed by Table 6.2 of the RUS and shown here as Table 35. The National Rail demand forecasting to 2031 has been produced through the modelling of population trends, land use changes and economic factors, together with the committed developments to the transport system.

9.3.8 The modelling covers all National Rail corridors into Central London, focussing on the morning peak period since, this is the period that Network Rail acknowledges is of greatest demand upon which strategic level planning is based and it would an assumption for Airport Growth.




66

Table 35: Busiest Morning Peak Hour Growth Forecasts (Committed Schemes Only)

Passengers on Route in Busiest Morning Peak Hour LONDON ST PANCRAS

SERVICE GROUP 2010 TOTAL 2031 TOTAL Extra

Passengers Growth

Thameslink MML 9,900 14,700 4,800 49%

MML Long Distance 2,300 3,800 1,500 68%

High Speed 1 (domestic) 2,500 5,300 2,800 111%

TOTAL 14,700 23,800 9,100 -


9.3.9 From Table 36 extracted from Table 7.1 of the RUS it can be noted that additional interventions are not required for the Thameslink Services to accommodate predicted growth by 2031; the required capacity is delivered by completion of the Thameslink Programme in 2018 and the potential for 24 trains per hour. The RUS Do-Minimum demand forecast assumes that the rail interventions that are described as committed, i.e. part of the do-minimum RUS baseline, are delivered; which includes the Thameslink programme.

9.3.10 There is however a peak capacity gap highlighted for the Midland Main Line (MML) based on currently committed schemes only. The size of the gap shown is noted in the RUS as an approximation of the capacity that would be needed in the busiest morning peak hour to supplement committed schemes, and thereby reduce the levels of overcrowding to industry benchmark levels along the corridor.

Table 36: 2031 Morning Peak Busiest Hour Demand, Capacity, Route Utilisation And Gap Forecasts (Do-Minimum)

2031 Capacity and Demand in High Peak Hour

LONDON ST PANCRAS

SERVICE GROUP Anticipated Capacity

Demand Forecast

Demand/ Capacity

Utilisation Ratio

Forecast gap (Based on 85%

Utilisation)

Thameslink MML 24,500 14,700 60% 0

MML Long Distance 2,900 3,800 133% 1,400

High Speed 1 (domestic) 5,700 5,300 93% 500

TOTAL 33,100 23,800 - 1,900


9.3.11 As noted previously in 8.2.5 above the RUS anticipates that this shortfall in commuter capacity on the MML would be resolved by replacing the existing High Speed Train fleet with higher capacity IEP trains or similar, following on from High Speed Train replacement on the Great Western Main Line (GWML) and East Coast Main Line (ECML) and in the longer term by demand between the East Midlands and London shifting to HS2. There is anticipated to be spare capacity on the Thameslink line with most Airport passengers likely to use this service whenever convenient for their journey.




67

9.4 Bus and Coach Patronage

9.4.1 A manual survey of the PTH was undertaken on Friday 24 August 2012 between the hours of 04:00-09:00hrs. The survey recorded arrival and departure times of individual buses and coaches at the various stands to determine arrival and departure times. The opportunity was also taken to record the number of passengers boarding and alighting from each service and any remaining on the vehicles, which were noted as through passengers.

9.4.2 A summary of the survey data by hour for the public bus and coach services is provided in Table 37.

Table 37: PTH Public Service Bus and Coach Demand - 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs)

BUSES AND COACHES TOTAL PASSENGERS TIME PERIOD ARRIVE DEPART BOARDERS ALIGHTERS THROUGH

04:00 - 05:00 29 26 25 646 22

05:00 - 06:00 36 37 44 684 38

06:00 - 07:00 41 35 78 582 35

07:00 - 08:00 46 48 612 475 27

08:00 - 09:00 43 41 604 449 51

TOTAL 195 187 1,363 2,836 173

9.4.3 Over the course of the survey the results indicate patronage of some 567 passengers per hour arriving at the PTH with 272 departing. The highest time period for arrivals at the Airport was recorded between 05:00-06:00hrs with most boarding to leave in the hour that followed. Notably time of highest number of arrivals occurred at a time when bus and coach services were less plentiful than later in the survey period, which is also true of the 04:00-05:00hrs period.

9.4.4 The survey also recorded the same information for Airport car park and Luton Airport Parkway Station shuttle services, with a summary of the data presented in Table 38.

Table 38: Airport Shuttle Services Patronage – 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs)

PASSENGERS

SHUTTLE SERVICE

AVE

FRQ/ HR BOARDING ALIGHTING THROUGH TOTAL

PARKWAY SHUTTLE 5.4 413 644 0 1,057

LONG TERM CAR PARK 4.6 45 578 2 625

CAR HIRE CENTRE 6.2 186 444 3 633

MID TERM CAR PARK 5.4 80 431 0 511

TOTAL 724 2,097 5 2,826

9.4.5 On average the Luton Airport Parkway Shuttle service delivered around 129 people per hour to the Airport balanced by some 69 people leaving; an average occupancy of 24 and 15 passengers per vehicle, respectively. The Airport’s own shuttle services returned similar values with the LTCP shuttle bringing about 25 passengers per bus into the PTH, although returning with only about 2 at this time of day. Inbound patronage on the car hire shuttle is less with an average occupancy of 14 although returning is slightly higher with an average per vehicle of 6. An average of 16 passengers per vehicle alighted from the Mid Term shuttle bus with an average of 3 travelling back to the car park.




68

9.4.6 In terms of bus and coach dwell time at the Airport the survey results, shown in Table 39, indicated a significant difference between coach and local bus and other services. This would tend to reflect the distance travelled and timetabling requirements that may or may not require a lay-over at the PTH to accommodate driver changes or rest periods.

Table 39: PTH Average Bus/ Coach Dwell Times - 24 August 2012 (04:00-09:00hrs)

SERVICE/ NO. OPERATOR AVE DWELL TIME

(MM:SS)

61 Arriva Local Bus Service 05:00



99 Stagecoach 04:00

757 Greenline 11:20

easyBus 10:03

422 National Express 03:00






CAR HIRE CENTRE LLAOL 03:40

LTCP LLAOL 03:34

MTCP LLAOL 01:33

PARKWAY RAIL First Capital Connect 07:09

OVERALL AVERAGE 06:10

9.4.7 The busy August survey data represented a time of peak activity at the Airport and as a consequence was used as the basis for a capacity analysis of the current regular bus, coach and shuttle services. The results of this exercise are presented in Table 40. The analysis confirms that all the services available currently have reserve capacity with the capabilities to cater for additional passenger demand. Given that this was based on a busy peak day August survey, it is likely that on other days and at other times of the year adequate capacity is available to satisfy travel requirements.




69

Table 40: Bus Capacity Analysis – Friday 24 August 2012

Peak August 2012

SERVICE CAP OPERATOR Max Freq

Max Pax Capacity

Max Pax Demand

Max Hour

Loading

61 54 Arriva 1 54 5 9%

100 54 Arriva 4 216 32 15%

321 64 Arriva 3 192 10 5%

99 49 Stagecoach 1 49 9 18%

757 50 Greenline 6 300 64 21%

757 15 easyBus 5 75 12 16%

422 49 National Express 1 49 30 61%






CAR HIRE CENTRE 63 LLAOL 9 567 44 8%

LTCP 63 LLAOL 5 315 56 18%

MTCP 63 LLAOL 7 441 41 9%

DROP OFF ONLY 63 LLAOL 1 63 15 24%

PARKWAY RAIL 63 First Capital Connect 6 378 86 23%

9.5 Passengers Travelling by Private Motor Vehicles

9.5.1 To add further detail on travel patterns associated with Passenger journeys by private vehicle Table 4.3a and Table 9.9 of the 2010 CAA passenger surveys for the Airport have been interrogated. The results are presented in Table 41 below for the various UK Planning Regions, excluding Northern Ireland.

Table 41: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Planning Region (CAA Data 2010)

PLANNING REGION Total

Passengers

Private Vehicle

Mode Share

Passengers by Private

Mode

% of Private Vehicle Total

East Midlands 765,000 80.10% 612,765 10.8%

East of England 2,607,000 87.80% 2,288,946 40.5%

North East 20,000 75.70% 15,140 0.3%

North West 63,000 67.10% 42,273 0.7%

Scotland 13,000 35.80% 4,654 0.1%

South East 4,332,000 52.20% 2,261,304 40.0%

South West 170,000 57.40% 97,580 1.7%

Wales 58,000 69.00% 40,020 0.7%

West Midlands 305,000 69.70% 212,585 3.8%

Yorkshire & the Humber 104,000 69.70% 72,488 1.3%

TOTAL 8,437,000 - 5,647,755 100.0%

9.5.2 Passengers from the East and South East of England dominate the table and are broadly equal in terms of their contribution to the 2010 data set. The East Midlands is next highest at nearly 11%, with the remaining areas much lower by comparison. The results provide a reasonable indication of the general catchment area of the Airport for those choosing to travel




70

by private vehicle. They also suggest that this mode falls as distance to be travelled increases; it is reasonable to assume that public transport or in some cases air transfers would provide the alternative to satisfy these longer journeys.

9.5.3 Further scrutiny of these data is provided in Table 42 for the key East and South East of England Regions. This is followed in Table 43 by further details related to the catchment of the Greater London Boroughs and at a more local level for Bedfordshire, to include Luton, and adjoining Hertfordshire.

Table 42: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Key Sub Regions (CAA Data 2010)

East of England Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


Cambridgeshire County 215,117 78.14% 168,098 30.8%

City of Peterborough 61,725 97.31% 60,066 11.0%

Essex 9,020 16.50% 1,488 0.3%

Essex County 144,559 89.42% 129,265 23.7%

Norfolk County 89,968 86.86% 78,146 14.3%

Southend-on-Sea 16,064 74.86% 12,025 2.2%

Suffolk County 89,465 94.23% 84,301 15.5%

Thurrock 11,823 100.00% 11,823 2.2%

TOTAL EAST of ENGLAND 637,741 - 545,212 100.0%

South East Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


Bracknell Forest 8,933 100.00% 8,933 0.9%

Buckinghamshire County 289,594 91.37% 264,600 26.5%

City of Portsmouth 7,967 48.75% 3,884 0.4%

City of Southampton 34,468 78.79% 27,158 2.7%

East Sussex County 12,434 89.69% 11,152 1.1%

Hampshire County 52,207 85.07% 44,412 4.4%

Isle of Wight 5,271 30.41% 1,603 0.2%

Kent County 64,231 62.56% 40,183 4.0%

Medway 21,845 62.35% 13,620 1.4%

Milton Keynes 302,419 88.86% 268,730 26.9%

Oxfordshire County 155,304 61.24% 95,113 9.5%

Reading 47,553 84.94% 40,393 4.0%

Slough 26,589 87.91% 23,374 2.3%

Surrey 93,803 81.99% 76,909 7.7%

The City of Brighton & Hove

15,291 33.11% 5,063 0.5%

West Berkshire 8,429 100.00% 8,429 0.8%

West Sussex 11,862 37.32% 4,427 0.4%

West Sussex County 32,776 52.17% 17,100 1.7%

Windsor & Maidenhead 38,363 91.67% 35,167 3.5%

Wokingham 12,518 75.91% 9,502 1.0%

TOTAL SOUTH EAST 1,241,857 80.50% 999,752 100.0%




71

Table 43: LLA Passengers by Private Vehicles by Key Local Areas (CAA Data 2010)

Greater London Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


LB Dagenham 12,769 70.82% 9,043 0.72%

LB Barnet 315,285 69.89% 220,357 17.53%

LB Bexley 3,692 76.81% 2,836 0.23%

LB Brent 155,076 58.36% 90,504 7.20%

LB Bromley 21,686 29.69% 6,438 0.51%

LB Camden 280,809 19.48% 54,711 4.35%

City of London 100,904 5.50% 5,550 0.44%

City of Westminster 391,427 16.89% 66,110 5.26%

LB Croydon 40,972 40.90% 16,756 1.33%

LB Ealing 127,807 66.07% 84,445 6.72%

LB Enfield 96,740 87.51% 84,653 6.73%

Grtr London Unspecified 92,784 45.91% 42,599 3.39%

LB Greenwich 28,228 27.38% 7,728 0.61%

LB Hackney 69,839 28.06% 19,596 1.56%

LB Ham’smith & Fulham 56,024 19.46% 10,900 0.87%

LB Haringey 123,116 62.91% 77,457 6.16%

LB Harrow 104,361 90.97% 94,941 7.55%

LB Havering 22,639 80.97% 18,330 1.46%

LB Heathrow Airport 29,661 23.73% 7,038 0.56%

LB Hillingdon 61,604 79.73% 49,114 3.91%

LB Hounslow 70,871 69.09% 48,967 3.90%

LB Islington 111,075 28.46% 31,609 2.51%

LB Kensington & Chelsea 118,778 16.90% 20,068 1.60%

LB Kingston Upon Thames 19,973 43.73% 8,734 0.69%

LB Lambeth 102,200 7.76% 7,929 0.63%

LB Lewisham 54,246 12.32% 6,685 0.53%

London City Airport 1,062 100.00% 1,062 0.08%

LB Merton 54,855 20.92% 11,474 0.91%

LB Newham 36,426 28.83% 10,501 0.84%

LB Redbridge 41,016 80.50% 33,019 2.63%

LB Richm’d Upon Thames 38,937 60.61% 23,600 1.88%

LB Southwark 70,403 17.89% 12,595 1.00%

LB Sutton 10,342 52.07% 5,385 0.43%

LB Tower Hamlets 96,353 23.25% 22,405 1.78%

LB Waltham Forest 53,558 57.86% 30,990 2.47%

LB Wandsworth 74,440 17.43% 12,974 1.03%

TOTAL GREATER LONDON

3,089,958 40.68% 1,257,103 100.00%




72

Bedfordshire Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


Luton Airport 10,509 41.83% 296,507 100%

Bedfordshire & Luton Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


Bedford District 183,116 60.57% 110,922 15.1%

Beds County Unspecified 2,648 100.00% 2,648 0.4%

Mid Beds District 278,137 95.15% 264,660 36.1%

South Beds District 59,623 97.37% 58,053 7.9%

Luton 322,065 92.06% 296,507 40.5%

TOTAL BEDS & LUTON 523,524 83.33% 436,283 100.0%

Hertfordshire Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Vehicle


Broxbourne District 24,296 100.00% 24,296 2.4%

Dacorum District 160,018 92.30% 147,693 14.7%

East Hertfordshire District 43,741 94.36% 41,275 4.1%

Herts County Unspecified 3,182 100.00% 3,182 0.3%

Hertsmere District 96,328 80.49% 77,539 7.7%

North Herts District 118,899 95.04% 113,002 11.2%

St. Albans District 300,309 85.05% 255,402 25.4%

Stevenage District 96,605 98.18% 94,851 9.4%

Three Rivers District 38,032 97.45% 37,063 3.7%

Watford District 146,527 91.32% 133,815 13.3%

Welwyn 84,767 90.41% 76,634 7.6%

TOTAL HERTFORDSHIRE 1,112,704 90.30% 1,004,752 100.0%

9.5.4 For ease of reference a summary of the main geographical areas attracted to the Airport is provided by Table 44.

Table 44: LLA Summary of Main Geographical Areas and Passenger Demand

Administrative Area Passengers Private

Vehicle Mode Share


Mode


East of England 637,741 85.49% 545,212 12.0%

South East 1,241,857 80.50% 999,752 22.0%

London & Greater London 3,089,958 40.68% 1,257,103 27.7%

Luton Airport 10.509 41.83% 4,396 0.1%

Bedfordshire & Luton 845,589 86.66% 732,790 16.1%

Hertfordshire 1,112,704 90.30% 1,004,752 22.1%

TOTAL 6,938,358 65.49% 4,544,005 100.0%




73

9.5.5 In terms of passengers travelling by private vehicle the results reveal that London and Greater London and the South East of England are a popular source for passenger interaction with the Airport. The survey data also shows the relative attractiveness of the Airport in terms of passengers originating or destined for Bedfordshire and Luton or adjoining Hertfordshire, with the figures for Hertfordshire broadly comparable with those for the South East Region.

9.5.6 Within Bedfordshire and Luton the most prevalent journey by private mode are associated with Luton itself (40%) followed closely by Mid Bedfordshire District (36%). In terms of Luton there are numerous route choices available for local drivers that would satisfy an Airport related journey, however the route via Kimpton Road through the town centre, and links towards the A505 corridor are considered to be the most attractive for many journeys. In terms of passengers form Mid Bedfordshire and Bedford Borough the strategic choice is likely to focus on the A6 and the M1 from the North with the potential for others to use the A5 corridor in conjunction with the local Dunstable and Luton network to gain access to and from the west.

9.5.7 In neighbouring Hertfordshire; St Albans (25%), Watford District (13%), Dacorum (15%) and finally North Herts District (11%) head the table, with the three leading candidates representing just over half of the overall County total. Given the location of these three relative to the Airport it is not unreasonable to suggest that most travellers would use the strategic road network and in particular the M1 to accomplish their journey. In terms of North Hertfordshire a route to enter Luton by the A505 is considered to be the most attractive proposition, although some local drivers may choose to travel using the more local network that connects with Eaton Green Road. Further detail on journeys involving Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire are discussed in more detail in terms of off-site impacts later in Section 14.7.

9.5.8 The figures tend to underline the attractiveness of the Airport to cater for local demand involving air travel. While these local trips can be identified as Airport related they are likely to be substituting a more regular trip carried out on the network as part of normal commuting and other day to day travel behaviours. As a consequence it is reasonable to assume that in most cases these trips would normally be contributing to local network flows elsewhere in the area and have simply varied their destination and possibly travel times to coincide with a holiday or business trip associated with the Airport. Transport work undertaken by ARUP

17 to inform the

LLAL 18mppa Masterplan has translated these 2010 CAA data to provide an indicative distribution for private vehicle trips on the network. ARUP assigned the number of passengers identified to the most appropriate access routes based on logical choice. The proportions assumed are reproduced for information in Table 45.

Table 45: LLA 2010 Overall Passenger Distribution by Origin Route

ROUTE PROPORTION OF TRIPS

M1 (North) from Northampton 23.3%

M1 (South) from London 48.6%

A6 (North) from Bedford 3.6%

A505 (East) from Hitchin 12.5%

A505 (West) from Dunstable 3.1%

A1081 London Road (South) from Harpenden 4.1%

B653 Lower Harpenden Road from Harpenden 2.0%

Eaton Green Road from Tea Green 2.7%

TOTAL 100%

Source: Arup Transport Assessment for LLAL May 2012

17

Future Luton Optimisation. Transport Assessment (May 2012). Arup




74

9.5.9 ARUP also provided detail of the routes within its report in graphic form as Figure 7 and this is also included here for ease of reference as Figure 18, with the percentages enlarged by URS to aid identification.

Figure 18: ARUP Passenger Trip Distribution by Private Vehicles

9.5.10 It is acknowledged that this pattern of distribution is based on annual figures. From survey data discussed later in this report URS has identified that there are likely to be more subtle variations on an hour-by-hour and day-by-day basis in response to seasonal travel patterns and the specific time of day. The proportions do however provide a reasonable overview to inform the baseline position in terms of general travel patterns for Airport related trips by private vehicle.

9.6 Vehicle Occupancy

9.6.1 As a further guide to passenger travel behaviour, vehicle occupancy surveys were undertaken on Friday 24 August 2012 for the period 04:00 - 09:00hrs. These were performed at the entrance and exit to the LLA public car parks to record vehicle type and number of occupants.

9.6.2 The record for inbound vehicles is shown in Figure 19 to indicate one or two occupants per car was a common feature across all the LLA car park facilities.

9.6.3 Cars and private hire vehicles entering the DOZ are distinguished by two occupants with one the driver; this is a characteristic that is very likely to reflect a journey to involve a single passenger in transit. Notably all the car parks include a reasonable proportion of single occupancy vehicles that may reflect only a single passenger flying; although in the case of the DOZ in particular it is reasonable to assume that single car occupancy and drivers of some other vehicles are using the area to collect as well as pick-up some passengers.

3% 4%

13%

3%

2% 4%

23%

49%




75

9.6.4 Operationally drivers are generally encouraged to use the Short and Mid-Term car parks for pick-up and relatively longer term set-down activities to manage demand through the DOZ.

Figure 19: LLA Public Parking– INBOUND Vehicle Occupancy (04:00 - 09:00hrs)

9.6.5 The survey for outbound traffic is shown in Figure 20. The use of the DOZ by cars and private hire vehicles is clear and denoted by the dominant proportion of single occupancy vehicles recorded on exit from the facility. Given the time of day it is not unreasonable that most activity is focussed on vehicles arriving at the Airport attracted by the morning flight schedule. As a consequence, with the obvious exception of the DOZ, the proportion of outbound vehicles at each car park is less than each corresponding value recorded for inbound traffic.




76

Figure 20: LLA Public Parking– OUTBOUND Vehicle Occupancy (04:00 - 09:00hrs)

9.6.6 Table 46 compares the observed inbound and outbound average occupancy rates recorded during the five hour AM survey period for the three main vehicle types; noting that all values include the driver.

Table 46: LLA Passenger Car Parks - Ave Vehicle Occupancy by Type (04:00 – 09:00hrs)

PRIVATE CAR PRIVATE HIRE LGV LLA CAR PARK

Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound

LONG TERM 2.04 1.63 - - 1.29 -

MID TERM 1.64 1.44 1.17 1.00 1.33 1.00

SHORT TERM 1.88 1.93 1.60 2.40 1.31 1.93

DOZ 2.44 1.31 2.75 1.09 1.81 1.18

AVERAGE 2.0 1.58 1.84 1.49 1.44 1.37

9.6.7 The values suggest that generally occupancy rates were quite low, with most vehicles carrying only one or two occupants, which includes the driver.

9.6.8 A record of mini-buses entering and leaving at each car park was also recorded over the course of the survey period to register both the demand and number of occupants. The results are provided in Table 47.




77

Table 47: LLA Passenger Car Parks – Mini Bus Occupancy (04:00 – 09:00hrs)

VEHICLES OCCUPANTS OCC/ VEH LLA CAR PARK

Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound

LONG TERM 1 0 2 - 2.0 -

MID TERM 3 1 3 1 1.0 1.0

SHORT TERM 10 2 11 18 1.1 9.0

DOZ 33 31 140 47 4.2 1.5

TOTAL 47 34 156 66 - -

9.6.9 The figures for the Long and Medium Term car parks are potentially not representative of the passenger handling capabilities of these vehicles, as relatively few were recorded over the survey period. Higher numbers were observed in the DOZ and STCP, which is likely to reflect the fact that mini-buses are generally used to transport larger groups and these two parking zones are likely to be viewed as more attractive for this purpose given their proximity to the terminal. This assumption is supported by the survey results, which suggest that these vehicles are generally employed for drop-off and pick-up activities driven by a third party, and therefore do not require longer duration parking.

9.7 Air Passenger Time Lags

9.7.1 Passengers need surface access to the Airport at most times of the day and night. The exact time depends on flight schedules; the chosen travel mode and passenger perception of the time to be enjoyed at the Airport surrounding flight arrival or departure.

9.7.2 Air passenger movements are effectively measured to correspond with actual passenger numbers known to embark and disembark from a plane situated on the runway. As a consequence the corresponding times and numbers can be closely linked with flight records for any particular day. Surface access passenger movements however attract specific time lags depending on the method of travel used, which need to account for access time to and from the Airport by particular modes. The access/egress times include the time taken to transfer to/ from the surface access mode and also the allowances made for perceptions regarding service unreliability. The time lags have been calibrated to observed conditions and then used to calculate the hourly profile of surface access trips by mode.

Air Passenger Time Lags therefore account for;

• OUT-BOUND PASSENGERS: check in, security, boarding, interchange time from surface access mode;

• IN-BOUND PASSENGERS: alighting, baggage retrieval, customs and immigration, interchange to surface access mode.

These can vary by journey purpose and chosen mode.

9.7.3 Users of public transport are generally more sensitive to potential delays than those using private car and as such they arrive over a longer period of time, with more people arriving earlier, most noticeably for coach and bus services. It is reasonable to assume that the times of departure for disembarking passengers are the same for all modes (except taxi, which has a shorter access time from terminal to vehicle); based on the availability of services and the time it takes to get from the runway through customs and baggage retrieval. People often arrive at the Airport 2-3 hours before the flight, but depart soon after baggage reclaim.

9.7.4 Car time lags also include two to three additional journeys for both embarking and disembarking passengers associated with escort trips that are generated by passengers who are dropped off or picked-up by friends and family.




78

9.8 Staff Travel

9.8.1 More than 8,000 people are employed at LLA. Private car remains the dominant mode of transport both to and from the airport, with around two thirds of staff commuting alone by car in 2010.

Table 48: LLA Staff Travel by Mode (%)

MODE 2000 2008 2010

Drive Alone 78% 72.0% 66.2%

Car Share 11% 9.7% 11.7%

Taxi 1% 1.7% 1.2%

Motorcycle 2% 0.8% 1.2%

Rail 2% 5.4% 5.2%

Bus/Coach 2% 6.1% 7.5%

Cycle 1% 1.0% 2.4%

Walk 3% 3.4% 4.5%

Other - - 0.2%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100%

Source: Staff Travel Surveys

*2000 data only available as integers. 2010 data based on 727 responses

9.8.2 This is less than previous years with a fall from 78% and 72% respectively in 2000 and 2008. Public transport (rail/bus) and car share show a corresponding increase in modal use.

9.8.3 Unlike the distribution of passengers travelling to/ from the airport, those working at the airport live relatively nearby, with approximately half having a Luton postcode (broadly including Luton, Dunstable, Houghton Regis and Leighton Buzzard). These staff also represent half of the drive alone trips and are therefore targetable for more sustainable travel modes including the new Busway Link and cycling.

Table 49: Staff Catchment 2010 by Post Code Area and Work Pattern

MODE SHIFT WORKER NON-SHIFT STAFF AVE

Luton (LU) 65.2% 42.8% 52.4%

Milton Keynes (MK) 9% 12.3% 10.9%

Stevenage (SG) 7.9% 11.1% 9.7%

St Albans (SA) 3.9% 6.6% 5.4%

Hemel Hempstead (HP) 1.1% 4% 2.8%

Northampton (NN) 3.7% 1.9% 2.7%

Cambridge (CB) 1.1% 1.9% 1.6%

Watford (WD) 0.8% 2.1% 1.6%

Chelmsford (CM) 1.4% 1.5% 1.5%

London N (N) 0.3% 2.15 1.3%

Peterborough (PE) 0.8% 1.7% 1.3%

London NW (NW) 0.3% 1.7% 1.1%

Others 4.5% 10.2% 7.7%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100%

Source: Staff Travel Survey. Based on 826 responses




79

9.8.4 Shift workers are more concentrated in Luton postcodes, underlining the need for transport options to service these shift patterns with non-office and/ or irregular patterns of working. It should also be noted that a significant proportion of staff still travel some distance into work at the Airport, particularly in comparison to 2008.

Figure 21: Start and Finish Times of Non-Shift Workers

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

00:0

0

01:3

0

03:0

0

04:3

0

06:0

0

07:3

0

09:0

0

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

19:3

0

21:0

0

22:3

0

Hour starting

% o

f re

sp

on

ses

Starts

Finishes

Source: LLA Staff Survey 2010

Figure 22: Start and Finish Times of Shift Workers

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

00:0

0

01:3

0

03:0

0

04:3

0

06:0

0

07:3

0

09:0

0

10:3

0

12:0

0

13:3

0

15:0

0

16:3

0

18:0

0

19:3

0

21:0

0

22:3

0

Hour starting

% o

f re

sp

on

ses

Starts

Finishes

Source: LLA Staff Survey 2010




80

10 SCHEDULE OF LIKELY COMMITED DEVELOPMENT

10.1 Identified Development Traffic

10.1.1 It has been agreed with LBC that the schedule of future committed development should match that included in the assessment of M1 J10a

18 to maintain consistency of approach with

previous network assessment.

10.1.2 The agreed schedule included LLA expansion and a note to point out that although the Airport master plan was withdrawn in 2007, growth in passenger numbers was expected, with the Airport likely to play a greater role in future given Government Policy change related to Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. The schedule in the LBC M1 J10a assessment assumed that there was a greater than 70 percent chance of the development going ahead. This final schedule of agreed future development, excluding the Airport is reproduced here as Table 50.

Table 50: Identified Developments and Status19

OPERATOR LAND USE LIKELIHOOD

CENTURY PARK (Prologis Development Ltd)

Mixed use development to immediate east of London-Luton Airport.

Very Likely

NAPIER PARK

Mixed Use development on former General Motors Plant. Office, residential, general industrial, hotel & fitness centre, car park and retail uses planned. In addition could be bulky goods retail floor-space, casino and conferencing facility.

Very Likely

IBC VAN PARK Change of use: Removed from forecasts -

EATON GREEN (Vauxhall Trailer Park)

Mixed use development on land south of Eaton Green Road

Very Likely

STIRLING PLACE (Kimpton Road)

Mixed Use development on former Kimpton Distribution Company premises, Kimpton Road. Office, residential and retail uses planned.

Very Likely

(Now underway)

TECHNOLOGY PARK, Butterfield

Development comprising – Innovation Centre, Technology Park, hotel and Park & Ride facility.

Very Likely

(Now exists)

POWER COURT (Town Centre Shopping)

Mixed use development on industrial site and car park facility. Development comprises retail, residential, community and leisure uses and parking.

Very Likely

WHITBREAD HOUSE Redevelopment of vacant office block into commercial offices, residential units and basement car park.

Very Likely

STOCKWOOD PARK Stadium and associated development (i.e. development size and mix in extant local plan)

Very Likely

EAST LUTON URBAN EXTENSION

Deleted from emerging LDF Less than Likely

18

M1 Junction 10A Grade Separation – Forecasting Report No: D121475/4/6. July 2011. URS Scott Wilson Ltd 19

Reproduced from Table 5-4 M1 Junction 10A Grade Separation – Forecasting Report No: D121475/4/6. July 2011. URS Scott Wilson Ltd




81

10.1.3 It was noted at the time that some of the assumed developments did not have planning permission, but were recognised as aspirations to be included in the forthcoming LDF. For this reason they were included in the M1 J10a assessment and will be included once again where relevant within this TA (and their status updated as shown in Table 50).

10.1.4 Since the schedule of committed development was complied to inform the assessment of M1 J10a

20, the planning process has advanced matters related to Stirling Place, Kimpton Road

and development is now underway. Butterfield Technology Park is also being developed.

10.1.5 Stirling Place will enable a link between Luton Parkway station through to the main Napier Park site. This new station connection will provide a public transport gateway to both the proposed development and the wider local community. Also of note the outline planning permission for Napier Park also included an allocation of 5,000 car parking spaces for Airport users. Detailed consent has been granted for the first residential and commercial phases of the park.

10.2 Wigmore Employment Area (Century Park)

10.2.1 The Century Park site was identified in the Borough of Luton Local Plan 1997as the Wigmore Employment Area. Policy EMP3 proposes a development comprising B1 and B8 uses, together with related services (A1-A3), leisure (D2) and hotel uses (C1). LBC resolved to grant Outline planning permission in April 1996, subject to a Section106 Agreement (Permission Nos. L/19596/B & C - twin-tracked applications), which have now expired.

10.2.2 Two potential access roads to the land were submitted with the application in the form of indicative plans to show:

• A “southern” access road across (and beneath) the Airport; and

• A “northern” access road (surface only) running from Frank Lester Way along President Way, through the cargo centre and then along the western and southern edges of Wigmore Valley Park.

10.2.3 These were indicative drawings and the access routes were the subject of separate applications for consideration. The indicative routes were confirmed in a Planning Position Statement prepared by LBC and published in November 1997. The application only relates to the development of the land within Wigmore Employment Area (i.e. now Century Park) and not to the two options for vehicular access.

10.2.4 The Borough of Luton Local Plan 2001-2011 also maintained the policy commitment to the Wigmore Employment Area through Policy EM3, and defines it to include an access route on the published Proposals Map. See Figure 23.

10.2.5 EM3 requires that:

[A] a new vehicular access from Airport Way is provided as shown on the Proposals Map, and no use is made of Eaton Green Road to provide access, except for cyclists, pedestrians and in emergencies;

20

M1 Junction 10A Grade Separation – Forecasting Report No: D121475/4/6. July 2011. URS Scott Wilson Ltd




82

Figure 23: LBC Local Plan 2001-2011 – Proposals Map Extract for Wigmore Employment Area (Century Park)

10.2.6 The proposals map attached with EM3 confirmed the requirement for a route from the Holiday Inn roundabout passing east through the existing Airport’s MTCP to then travel gradually north east to access the employment area. The alignment included a proposed tunnel to navigate beneath the airport.

10.2.7 An early draft of the Section 106 Agreement from 1996 referred to required contributions to the ELC Scheme. As this scheme is now fully funded and built, URS understand that the S106 Agreement has been redrafted by LBC to require a contribution to highway infrastructure works, which may include M1 Junction 10A, as the Council now consider this would be more appropriate. As the timing of the development is unknown, the Section 106 Agreement has been worded to allow for the contribution to be directed to the most appropriate scheme, rather than restricting the contribution to one particular scheme.

10.2.8 Outline consent for Wigmore Employment Area (Century Park) was eventually granted in 2010 following the satisfactory completion of the S106 agreement. As the application does not include details of access, the S106 still includes reference to the need to agree a means of access prior to work commencing on site.

10.2.9 Reference to comments on the status of the Local Plan in 3.3.1 above would indicate that Policy EM3 remains current at this time and as a consequence the Policy commitment for a tunnel route passing through the Airport’s MTCP remains valid.

10.2.10 In summary there is outline consent for Century Park but with means of access yet to be determined. The current policy standing suggests that this would require a tunnel option to accord with Policy EM3, although historically this has not proved to be commercially viable for delivery through private investment. URS is aware that the developer has put forward another proposal for access that is under consideration by LBC and others. This involves an access road through the CTA and subsequently beneath Airport airside land to link with the proposed development further east, although this is not finalised or consented. As a consequence there remains uncertainty on the viability of a means of access to serve the Century Park development, despite the consent for the land.

10.3 Traffic Associated with Committed Development

10.3.1 To allow for the effects of committed developments in the future, it was necessary to estimate the traffic generated by each site, and its distribution around the local network, so that it could be incorporated into the future scenario modelling as presented in Section 11. A characteristic assumption of this approach is that this traffic does not vary through time, but remains constant on the basis that once the development is in place, it generates a fixed level of traffic unless there is further expansion.




83

10.3.2 The standard source of traffic estimates for such developments are the Transport Assessments. These were obtained from the planning authority and the traffic assumptions extracted. While all estimated the number of peak time trips generated (both inbound and outbound), few estimated the distribution of these trips beyond a fairly close range – in some cases no further than the turning proportions at the nearest junction. In these cases it was therefore necessary to estimate the wider distribution based on reasoned assumptions. The extent of this exercise was to coincide with the modelled network so that all future development trips were accounted for in the local modelling, and contributed accordingly to the future network loading.

10.3.3 A secondary issue was the extended time period used in the modelling – four hours in the morning and three in the evening, to cover the ‘standard’ peak times as well as the different profile of traffic associated with the airport. TAs (the current one excepted) generally look at the highest hours only to ensure the required ‘worst cases’ are addressed and those for the committed development were no exception, using 08:00-09:00 in the AM and 17:00-18:00 in the PM. The way this was dealt with was to use TRICS (the widely-used survey database of traffic generation by land use type, time of day etc) to derive a profile of trip generation by hour for similar development types and then to factor those in the TA by the ratio of the TRICS values to the highest hour values to estimate the additional hours’ traffic.

10.3.4 As an arbitrary example, for a committed housing development with inbound and outbound generation provided for 08:00-09:00 in the TA, it was necessary to estimate corresponding figures for other hours. If TRICS estimated the average traffic generated by housing developments in Bedfordshire to be 2.5 per household outbound in the peak hour 08:00-09:00, and 0.5 for say 06:00-07:00, then to obtain the outbound trips for the development in question in the hour 06:00-07:00 the total outbound generation in the TA (08:00-09:00) was factored by 0.5/2.5, i.e. 0.2. The distribution of trips in these other hours was assumed to be identical to that of the highest hour and therefore represents a ‘worst case’ assessment.

10.3.5 For larger developments such as Butterfield, the initial manual assumptions made about its wider distribution were reviewed, as the volumes of traffic were such that a poor estimate could have a significant but not necessarily accurate effect on particular corridors. In these cases a better estimate was made through running ODYSSEUS, URS’s bespoke software designed for this purpose, originally developed for the HA. It distributes traffic according to a ‘gravity’ function; so for example trips generated by a commercial or industrial development are ‘attracted’ by housing areas, and distributed in accordance with a gravity function based on the size and proximity of surrounding housing developments, using ward-level census data, and the quickest routes to them. This improved the accuracy of the distributions to and from these more significant developments.

10.3.6 The development flows for the AM and PM peak hours are provided on schematic diagrams in Appendix H, along with the original assumptions taken from the TAs.

10.4 Committed Development Distribution

Napier Park

10.4.1 The distribution was provided within the TA for the majority of the network; however assumptions had to be made regarding the distribution at junction 12 and at the junctions north of Eaton Green Road (9, 10 & 11). For junction 12, turning proportions recorded in the MCC survey were used to distribute the traffic whilst at junctions 9, 10 and 11 it was assumed that all traffic would continue on the A505.

Stirling Place

10.4.2 The distribution used the same method as for Napier Park.




84

Eaton Green

10.4.3 The TA indicated that a 70/30 split west/east was expected. The 30% travelling west was assumed to head to junction 12 where it was distributed according to the turning proportions recorded in the MCC survey. The 70% heading west arrived at the A505 and a 50/50 split heading north/south was assumed. The traffic heading south was assumed to leave the network heading west on the A1081 (ELC), whilst the traffic heading north was assumed to continue northbound on the A505.

Power Court

10.4.4 The TA indicated that 5% of the development traffic was expected to use Hitchin Road and 16% to use Crawley Green Road. It was assumed that traffic using Hitchin Road (which is travelling from / to the north) is likely to head north using the A505. It was also assumed that traffic using Crawley Green Road (which is travelling from / to the west) is likely to head west using Eaton Green Road.

Butterfield

10.4.5 The TA indicated that 60% of the development has already been completed and so is included in the base year traffic flows, so only the 40% that remains to be built was considered as new development traffic. It was assumed that traffic accessing the park and ride was unlikely to be coming from the south as the park and ride buses are expected to drop passengers in the town centre (to the south). It was assumed that traffic wishing to access the park and ride site will approach from the north, so this element of the development traffic will not be distributed onto the modelled network. For the remaining traffic heading to and from the development site to and from the south the distribution was derived using URS’s bespoke gravity modelling tool, ODYSSEUS, as noted above. This estimated the following AM distribution: arrivals – Ashcroft Road (13%), Hitchin Road (58%), Crawley Green Road West (17%), and A1081 ELC (12%). Departures: – Ashcroft Road (11%), Hitchin Road (54%), Crawley Green Road West (20%), and A1081 ELC (15%). The distribution for the PM was the reverse of this.

Whitbread House

10.4.6 The TA indicated that 15% of the development traffic was expected to use Hitchin Road and 15% to use Crawley Green Road. It was assumed that traffic using Hitchin Road (which is travelling from / to the north) is likely to head north using the A505. It was assumed that traffic using Crawley Green Road (which is travelling from / to the west) is likely to head west using Eaton Green Road.

Stockwood Park

10.4.7 The TA indicated the traffic flows expected at the Gipsy Lane junction. The distribution of this traffic was also derived using ODYSSEUS, which estimated the following AM peak percentages: arrivals – Eaton Green Road East (45%), A505 North (55%). Departures – Eaton Green Road East (43%), A505 North (57%). The distribution for the PM was the reverse of this.

Century Park

10.4.8 The TA indicated the traffic flows expected on the Airport approach road, beyond which the distribution was again estimated by ODYSSEUS, which gave the following AM percentages: arrivals – Eaton Green Road East (10%), A1081 ELC (34%), and A505 North via Old Airport Way (56%). Departures – Eaton Green Road East (10%), A1081 ELC (37%), A505 North via Old Airport Way (53%). The distribution for the PM was the reverse of this.




85

11 FUTURE AIRPORT TRAVEL DEMAND

11.1 Trip Generation21

Forecast Assumptions

11.1.1 The trip generation for LLA landside traffic was provided as forecasts directly by LLAOL. These were based upon flight profiles, road capacity and public transport availability. The LLAOL forecasting model was originally developed in 2010, validated using 2009 base data for both flight profile and traffic survey data collected in that year. It has been further developed to include staff numbers in 2012 and revalidated using new 2012 traffic survey data. The assumptions underpinning the landside traffic forecasts have been based on:

1) Development up to 18mppa in 2028 on short (defined as flight sectors up to 6.5 hours) and medium haul routes only. The forecast is considered ‘worst case’ in that it assumes a higher proportion of business than may be the reality on a busy day, which overstates the landside vehicles generated by airport passengers by some 10%

2) Natural peak spreading in terms of flight patterns occurs with growth (i.e. Additional flights spread over the remainder of the day when compared with the peak busy hour) and this is reflected within the benchmark;

3) A degree of seasonal peak spreading through increased aircraft utilisation in the summer shoulder season and in the winter; and

4) Mode share assumptions consistent with the ASAS.

Forecast Methodology

11.1.2 The forecast future airline schedule is intended to represent the typical busy day namely the peak day of an average week in the peak month. For Luton this historically constitutes a typical Friday in August and the difference between a busy day and a peak day tends to be in load factor rather than the number of flights in the schedule. The output from this stage is a likely profile of arriving and departing passenger movements across each hour of the busy day.

11.1.3 Flight schedule is a mathematical projection based on the trends in the schedule pattern seen historically over time as the schedule has evolved to its current state of development. It incorporates and develops on the existing flight/ route schedule. The method therefore converts movements per hour to a viable flight schedule (for passengers, cargo, maintenance and executive aviation) by:

• Projecting passenger demand by route;

• Making assumptions for the number of aircraft based at LLA;

• Producing a feasible flight schedule;

11.1.4 The basis for the projection is historic LLA data (currently 2001-2010) for aircraft movements by hour on a typical busy day plotted against annual passenger throughputs with arrivals and departures being plotted separately. This is then projected against the future annual passenger forecast.

Mode Split

11.1.5 Mode split of trip generation is directly informed by the Airport Surface Access Strategy 2012-2017 (London Luton Airport, January 2012). In the ASAS the primary targets are:

• Increase the proportion of air passengers travelling to and from London Luton Airport by public transport to more than 40% by 2017; and

21

This section is based upon a technical methodology statement provided by LLAOL.




86

• To reduce the proportion of staff travelling alone by car to and from London Luton Airport.

11.1.6 The forecast model accommodates the mode shift from car to other modes and ensures that where additional capacity is required it is incorporated into the forecast traffic (for example more frequent long distance coach/ increased rail-air shuttle service to Luton Parkway Station). The passenger and staff mode shares adopted in the forecast model are presented in Table 51.

Table 51: Passenger and Staff 2028 - Future Mode Share

MODE PASSENGERS STAFF

Car 42,7% 60%

Car share Minimal 13.0%

Taxi 16.2% 1.2%

Motorcycle Minimal 1.2%

Rail 21.3% 5.8%

Bus/ Coach 19.4% 10.9%

Cycle Minimal 2.4%

Walk Minimal 5.1%

Other 0.4% 0.2%

TOTAL 100% 100%

11.1.7 While the ASAS publishes challenging targets for both passengers and staff, which are intended to be fully delivered by 2017, it has been agreed by both LBC and the HA that these are most likely to be realised over a longer horizon and certainly by 2028. As a consequence they are considered to be sufficiently robust for the 2028 forecast year network testing. In addition the focus on busy hour demand based on a peak season period presents a highly robust test of the Airport impact on the network that should accommodate any potential variation in mode behaviour towards less sustainable modes.

11.1.8 Car share between friends and family plus for drop-off and collect activities will be a feature of travel behaviour involving passenger journeys however, for the purposes of this TA all journeys by car have been included under the ‘Car’ mode. A distinction is however made for staff travel. As noted previously in Section 4.4, some passenger journeys do occur on foot between the airport and local hotels, however it is reasonable to assume that the main mode of transport even in this instance would involve a journey in some form or another by train, bus, coach or car. Once again the circumstances are considered different for staff travel and as a consequence the proportion of staff walking or cycling is identified in Table 51.

11.1.9 As a reflection of the long-term nature of the trip forecasts the mode shares of the ASAS have been adopted. As agreed with LBC, the masterplan and this TA are supported by a Framework Employee Travel Plan (FETP), which specifically identifies proposed measures to achieve the reduction in single occupancy car use by staff. This Plan incorporates timely review against targets to ensure that LLAOL is on-track and focussed to achieve the prescribed targets and to improve upon them where appropriate.




87

11.2 Forecast Rail Patronage

11.2.1 The LLAOL forecasting model has been used to predict future Rail patronage for a ‘busy’ August peak period in 2028, assuming the ASAS mode split assumptions. The result of this exercise is shown in Table 52. The baseline figures reported previously in Table 33 above have been subtracted to determine the potential additional demand that would follow growth at 18mppa; the additional patronage is provided in Table 53 that follows.

Table 52: LLAOL 2028 Rail Patronage Forecast for Peak Busy Day

Inbound Outbound Hour Comm Business Leisure TOTAL Business Leisure Total

Overall TOTAL

00:00 0 0 0 49 258 307 307

01:00 0 1 1 6 97 103 104

02:00 5 22 27 4 94 98 125

03:00 42 154 196 3 42 45 241

04:00 53 171 224 1 26 27 251

05:00 3 0 3 3 63 66 69

06:00 119 351 470 3 44 47 517

07:00 72 241 313 90 289 379 692

08:00 102 369 471 192 584 776 1,247

09:00 84 304 387 62 130 192 579

10:00 93 272 365 69 152 221 586

11:00 74 207 281 103 301 404 685

12:00 69 217 286 95 322 417 703

13:00 72 229 302 86 235 321 623

14:00 75 235 310 57 218 275 585

15:00 93 270 363 63 216 279 642

16:00 174 520 693 52 254 306 999

17:00 186 553 739 77 325 402 1,141

18:00 170 558 728 - - - 728

19:00 36 143 179 117 329 446 625

20:00 31 146 176 87 312 399 575

21:00 24 125 149 109 247 356 505

22:00 7 37 44 140 248 388 432

23:00 0 0 0 117 338 454 545

TOTAL 5,125 1,583 6,708 1,585 5,124 6,708 13,415




88

Table 53: LLAOL 2028 Forecast Additional Rail Patronage 2011-2028

Hour Commencing

ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTAL % INCREASE OVER BASE

00:00 -5 131 126 68.9%

01:00 0 3 3 3.0%

02:00 9 15 24 23.3%

03:00 80 25 105 76.6%

04:00 72 26 98 64.1%

05:00 -29 66 37 115.6%

06:00 191 47 238 85.3%

07:00 127 157 284 69.6%

08:00 247 322 569 83.9%

09:00 265 70 335 137.3%

10:00 242 123 365 164.4%

11:00 126 268 394 135.9%

12:00 112 269 381 118.3%

13:00 135 162 297 91.1%

14:00 170 96 266 83.6%

15:00 258 110 368 134.3%

16:00 347 199 635 150.0%

17:00 374 312 686 150.8%

18:00 377 - 377 107.4%

19:00 116 259 375 150.0%

20:00 123 250 373 184.7%%

21:00 100 221 321 174.5%

22:00 11 224 235 119.3%

23:00 -19 236 217 90.8%

TOTAL 3,429 3,591 7,020 111.2%

11.2.2 The results show a potential overall increase of two way 7,020 rail trips during the course of a busy day. The period 08:00-09:00hrs represents the highest period of additional demand in the morning, with 17:00-18:00hrs in the evening.

11.2.3 LLAOL has assessed the distribution of rail passenger origins based on current economic/ demographic distribution of passenger origins demographic, which are assumed as unlikely to change. From this information LLAOL has determined that that passenger distribution would broadly equate to around 87% using the line south of Luton Parkway Station with the remainder using the line north. The application of these proportions to the above Total demand provides the results in Table 54.




89

Table 54: ‘Busy Day’ Additional Airport Rail Passengers by Direction of Travel.

Origin/ Destination ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTAL

Northern Section 446 467 913

Southern Section 2,983 3,124 6,107

TOTAL 3,429 3,591 7,020

11.2.4 An indication of the additional Airport rail passenger demand for a busy Airport day in August requiring journeys either north or south of Luton Airport Parkway is shown by Table 55.

Table 55: Additional Airport Rail Passengers by Peak Hour and Origin/ Direction

AM

(08:00-09:00)

PM

(17:00-18:00) Origin/ Destination

ARRIVALS DEPARTURES ARRIVALS DEPARTURES

Northern Section 32 42 49 41

Southern Section 215 280 325 271

TOTAL 247 322 374 312

11.2.5 It is very likely that journeys using the southern section would be attracted to the Thameslink Service while most using the Northern section, wishing to travel to the north of Bedford, would use the Midland Mainline Train Service. The relative impact of this additional demand during the peak hours would however be relatively small when considered across the number of trains provided per hour.

11.2.6 The East Midland RUS22

specifies that beyond 2019, additional capacity is required to meet the growth projections for the MML. The new rolling stock for use on Long Distance High Speed services, such as that proposed by the Intercity Express Programme, would provide sufficient additional seating to manage growth over the longer term. Longer trains will however require some works at London St Pancras International, although the extent of the works has yet to be determined.

11.2.7 In the longer-term, the East Midland RUS forecasts that further growth would be met by 12-car operation on all Thameslink services and that a doubling of passenger demand on other passenger services in the East Midlands could be met by progressive lengthening of services together with any associated platform extensions and/or additional services that would provide other benefits such as improved connectivity.

11.2.8 It is considered that the capacity improvements provided with the Thameslink Line will accommodate much of this growth, which supports the ASAS strategy that promotes the opportunity for a significant number of passengers to make Airport related journeys by rail. It is however acknowledged that increased passenger numbers will add additional patronage to the Midland Mainline, which will rely on delivery of new trains and the outcome of HS2.

22

East Midlands Route Utilisation Strategy.February 2010. Network Rail




90

11.3 Forecast Bus and Coach Patronage

11.3.1 The baseline Bus and Coach Capacity calculations previously reported in Table 40 were extended to examine the impact at 18mppa on the assumption that the current level of mode share remains unchanged at 32.5%. The results are presented in Table 56.

Table 56: 18mppa Bus Capacity Analysis - Current Mode Share (32.5%)

18mppa - Current Mode Share (32.5%)


Max Pax Capacity

Max Pax Demand

Max Hour

Loading

61 54 Arriva 1 54 9 17%

100 54 Arriva 4 216 58 27%

321 64 Arriva 3 192 18 9%

99 49 Stagecoach 1 49 16 33%

757 50 Greenline 6 300 115 38%

757 15 easyBus 5 75 22 29%








LTCP 63 LLAOL 5 315 101 32%

MTCP 63 LLAOL 7 441 74 17%



11.3.2 The results indicate that despite the assumed increase in passenger numbers the majority of the services would still maintain the ability to cater for predicted demand based on existing frequencies. The exceptions involve National Express Services 422 and 737 where the calculated maximum loading is over 100%.

11.3.3 It is considered reasonable to expect that National Express would provide additional vehicles to take advantage of the commercial benefits to be gained by serving this extra demand. The forecast capacity for 18mppa assuming the ASAS mode share of 40% is presented in Table 57.




91

Table 57: 18mppa Bus Capacity Analysis – ASAS Mode Share (40%)

18mppa - Future Mode Share (40%)


Max Pax Capacity

Max Pax Demand

Max Hour

Loading

61 54 Arriva 1 54 11 21%

100 54 Arriva 4 216 71 33%

321 64 Arriva 3 192 22 12%

99 49 Stagecoach 1 49 20 41%

757 50 Greenline 6 300 142 47%

757 15 easyBus 5 75 27 35%








LTCP 63 LLAOL 5 315 101 32%

MTCP 63 LLAOL 7 441 74 17%



11.3.4 The forecasts at 18mppa assuming the ASAS mode share of 40% travelling by non-car mode continue to indicate that the majority of the services would still be able to cater for predicted demand based on the current level of service. The exceptions again involve National Express Services 422, and 737 with 707 approaching maximum loading values and 777 also indicating some signs of stress. Once again it is considered reasonable to expect National Express to address this potential shortfall by offering additional vehicles. Given the bus and coach capacity identified in hand with a reasonable prospect that commercial services will expand to take advantage of additional patronage there is every prospect that the ASAS targets for bus and coach mode shift will be realised with the prospect for future shift to this mode by passengers making Airport related journeys.

11.4 Forecast Airport Traffic Demand

11.4.1 The LLAOL forecasts for future traffic demand 2028 for the period 04:00 - 09:00hrs and 16:00 - 19:00hrs are presented for both inbound and outbound flows in Table 58 and Table 59 respectively. These data present the overall total Airport traffic anticipated on the network by 2028 and therefore the flows shown also include the element equivalent to current Airport demand.




92

Table 58: LLAOL Airport 18mppa - TOTAL Traffic Demand Forecasts 2028 – INBOUND

Vehicles: Highway to Airport 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

CTA Zone

To Taxi Rank 45 31 67 22 78 87 67 92

To DOZ 888 1,301 561 187 274 833 598 659

To Short-Term parking 363 530 228 67 94 283 185 166

Shuttle Bus (Off-Site Car Parks) 7 15 10 9 11 11 12 10

Shuttle Bus (Rail-Air) 1 8 7 7 8 10 10 8

Service Bus/Coach 5 8 11 13 14 24 18 18

Staff - to CTA 12 18 27 49 58 10 15 13

To Terminal (Deliveries) 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1

Car Park Management 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Sub Total 1,322 1,914 913 357 539 1,260 907 968

Shuttle Bus (Mid-Term) 7 11 7 6 8 7 8 7

Shuttle Bus (Long-Term) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Shuttle Bus (Car Hire + Staff) 6 6 6 6 15 8 8 6

Sub Total 17 21 17 16 27 19 20 17

TOTAL CTA DEMAND 1,339 1,935 930 373 566 1,279 927 985

Vehicles: Highway to Airport 04:00 05:00 06:00 0700 0800 1600 1700 1800

Mid-Term Car Park Zone

To Mid-Term parking 180 267 117 31 49 134 83 71

Staff - to Fire Station 1 2 3 6 7 1 2 2

Shuttle Bus (Mid-term) 1 2 3 6 7 1 2 2

Mid Term Sub Total 183 271 124 44 64 137 86 75

Vehicles: Highway to Airport 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 1600 1700 1800

Percival Way Zone

To Long-Term parking 77 110 46 12 13 35 16 4

To Hire Car Return 90 132 56 12 16 46 21 2

Staff - to Percival Way 178 220 312 383 378 78 84 63

Staff - to Frank Lester Way 16 19 29 53 69 18 21 24

Staff - to President Way 143 34 118 433 657 147 126 117

To Cargo 2 2 2 7 2 2 2 2



Percival Way Sub Total 517 527 573 910 1,154 339 283 222

TOTAL Airport Way Inbound 1,521 2,204 1,050 410 623 1,414 1,011 1,059

TOTAL CTA Inbound 1,339 1,935 930 373 566 1,279 927 985

TOTAL Percival Way Inbound 517 527 573 910 1,154 339 283 222

TOTAL AIRPORT Inbound 2,028 2,721 1,613 1,310 1,758 1,741 1,282 1,270

Less Airport Shuttles 2,011 2,700 1,596 1,294 1,731 1,722 1,262 1,253




93

Table 59: LLAOL Airport 18mppa - TOTAL Traffic Demand Forecasts 2028 – OUTBOUND

Vehicles: Airport > Highway 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 1600 1700 1800

CTA Zone

Ex Taxi Rank 29 31 67 22 78 87 67 92

Ex DOZ 888 1,301 561 187 274 833 598 659

Ex Short-Term parking 266 391 170 61 96 276 206 251

Shuttle Bus (Off-Site Car Parks) 7 15 10 9 11 11 12 10

Shuttle Bus (Rail-Air) 1 8 7 7 8 10 10 8

Service Bus/Coach 5 8 11 13 14 24 18 18

Staff - ex CTA 7 9 10 8 8 24 44 28

Ex Terminal (Deliveries) 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1

Car Park Management 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Sub Total 1,205 1,766 838 310 491 1,268 957 1,068

Shuttle Bus (Mid-Term) 7 11 7 6 8 7 8 7



17 21 17 16 27 19 20 17

TOTAL CTA DEMAND 1,222 1,787 855 326 518 1,287 977 1,085


Mid Term Car Park Zone

Ex Mid-Term parking 94 141 64 28 53 124 100 147

Staff - Ex Fire Station 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 4

Shuttle Bus (Mid-term) 7 11 7 6 8 7 8 7

Sub Total 102 153 72 35 62 134 113 158


Percival Way Zone

Ex Long-Term parking 3 7 5 5 10 39 37 61

Ex Hire Car Return 2 6 4 7 18 41 41 75

Staff - Ex Percival Way 66 76 79 82 85 195 420 425

Staff - Ex Frank Lester Way 13 15 17 11 21 45 39 27

Staff - Ex President Way 26 57 57 72 298 391 496 180

Ex Cargo 12 2 2 2 7 2 2 2

Shuttle Bus (Long-term) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4


132 173 174 190 459 724 1,048 780

TOTAL Airport Way Outbound 1,317 1,929 919 354 572 1,414 1,082 1,236

TOTAL CTA Outbound 1,222 1,787 855 326 518 1,287 977 1,085

TOTAL Percival Way Outbound 132 173 174 190 459 724 1,048 780

TOTAL AIRPORT Outbound 1,439 2,092 1,084 534 1,012 2,126 2,118 2,007

Less Airport Shuttles 1,422 2,071 1,067 518 985 2,107 2,098 1,990




94

11.4.2 The method of forecasting the future Airport transport demand was also applied by LLAOL to the 2012 base data to provide a forecast assuming a flight profile for August 2012 traffic. A comparison of the difference between the two is provided as a guide in Table 60.

Table 60: Comparative Traffic Demand by hour - August 2012 and Busy Day 2028




95

11.4.3 The figures indicate an overall demand of some 22,500 vehicles both inbound and outbound for the busy day August 2012 period. This can be compared with a potential rise for the busy day 2028 forecasts that indicate a further demand for 9,500 vehicles to each of these values over the course of a day. It should be noted that in some cases the individual hourly flows have fallen; this can be attributed to the variation in flight profiles predicted in future years.

11.4.4 Data presented earlier in Chapter 9 above confirms the seasonal and day-to-day variability of passenger demand, with August a popular period. The known variability in passenger demand also translates through to observed changes in traffic demand. As a consequence the use of August figures in this comparison provides a vigorous case from which to gauge the potential Airport impacts in overall traffic terms.

11.5 Trip Distribution

11.5.1 From the 2012 base year traffic surveys, it was necessary to distinguish the airport-related and non-airport-related traffic flows. This was needed so that the distribution of forecast airport traffic external to the CTA could be estimated based on that of the base airport traffic, given that no other data was readily available.

11.5.2 The separation of these two elements in the base year was based on a series of assumptions, informed by the use of ANPR data and observed junction turning proportions. These assumptions were applied to estimate the airport traffic, which was then subtracted from the total surveyed traffic to estimate the non-airport traffic.

11.5.3 The key assumptions relating to the traffic volumes generated due to the airport were:

• All inbound traffic passing a point immediately to the east of the Percival Way roundabout on the CTA approach was assumed to be airport-related by definition, as it is a cul-de-sac. Likewise all outbound vehicles;

• All traffic turning into or out of either President Way or Frank Lester Way (south east) was assumed to be airport-related, for the same reason; each is a cul-de-sac associated only with airport-based activity.

11.5.4 The majority of the airport traffic was identified from these counts. The only element missing was airport-related traffic heading to or from employment locations along Percival Way and Frank Lester Way (north west), which were indeterminate from the base counts as these roads are also associated with through traffic, both as a bona fide access route to the CTA from areas to the north east, and anecdotally as a ‘rat-run’ via Eaton Green Road or Crawley Green Road to avoid the A505.

11.5.5 The detailed assumptions underlying the distribution of this traffic through the wider network are presented in detail in Appendix I. Having estimated this in the base year for each hourly period, the distribution was applied to the new estimates of airport traffic generated for 18mppa as described above.

11.6 Future Car Parking Demand

11.6.1 Future car parking provision has been calculated based on 2008 occupancy data. This was considered the most robust baseline position for a number of reasons:

• Passenger throughput across 2008 was recorded at some 10.2mppa, compared with 9.1, 8,7 and 9.5mppa for 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively, therefore providing a robust baseline for demand;

• 2008 witnessed a relatively reliable car parking regime in terms of pricing strategy and use - 2010 experienced a period to involve closure of the LTCP for a period, with passengers redirected to the MTCP, while 2011 saw an unprecedented demand for travel around the Easter period in response to the close proximity of the regular and additional Bank Holidays that resulted from the Royal Wedding.




96

11.6.2 The aggregate effects of the changes in volume, mix and modal shift were calculated based on the record of car park occupancy data covering every hour for every day across 2008. A Vehicle Demand Uplift factor of 1.47 was subsequently applied to these data to forecast potential demand in 2028. The factor was determined from assumptions provided by LLAOL in Table 61:

Table 61: Assumed Passenger Uplift Factor for Future Car Parking Requirements

EFFECT OF PASSENGER VOLUME GROWTH

Pax 2008 10,189,722

Pax 2028 18,000,000

Pax Uplift Factor (Pro Rata) 1.77

Effect of FORECAST INCREASE in BUSINESS PASSENGERS

Business/ Leisure Split Business Leisure

2008 20% 80%

2028 25% 75%

Mix Uplift 1.04

EFFECT of MODAL SHIFT On-Site Off-Site

2008 15.30% 7.30%

2028 12.20% 7.50%

Modal Split Reduction 0.8

VEHICLE DEMAND UPLIFT 1.47

11.6.3 Overcrowding was assumed at occupancy levels above 85% for the STCP and MTCP and 90% for the LTCP in recognition of a greater propensity for use of the latter by less sensitive leisure travellers and a record for pre-booking.

11.6.4 As noted in 5.6 above current arrangements provide an overall total of 6,719 passenger and 3,835 staff car parking spaces; an overall total of 10,104.

11.6.5 The future car parking strategy includes for an early Interim extension to the existing STCP on land made available through the proposed release of the easyLand and existing RSS Enterprises sites with their associated staff car parks for public parking. The proposals also include future plans for a multi-storey car park that will eventually replace the proposed Interim open car parking area identified for the easyLand site.

11.6.6 The proposed multi-storey car park will provide up to 1,500 spaces on four floors. The proposed passenger car parking numbers associated with the evolution of the car parking strategy is confirmed in Table 62 for the interim solution, with Table 65 revealing the longer-term solution by 2028, which includes the proposed multi-storey car park on easyLand. In addition space has been allocated to accommodate 97 spaces for the DOZ that will be located in close proximity to the CTA. For simplicity and consistency the locations in each table are identified to coincide with current naming conventions, however the Airport car parking strategy uses a more proactive management regime that overlays the more simple length of stay car park title. This enables a more proactive approach to parking demand, which is discussed in more details in 11.6.14 below.



BDRP0008 LLAOL 18MPPA TA FINAL 271112.DOC 27 November 2012

97

11.6.7 As a consequence it is reasonable to assess the car parking requirements in terms of overall provision, as Airport parking is and will continue to be managed to maximise the space available between the various facilities and thereby avoid potential capacity issues in one area when there is spare capacity in another; which is a sensible use of resource.

Table 62: Interim Car Parking Allocation (includes use of easyLand)

LOCATION STANDARD DISABLED PRIORITY TOTAL

Short-Term 1,087 33 1,500

Short -Term (easyLand) 314 66

Mid-Term 2,443 70 2,513

Long-Term 4,378 118 4,496

OVERALL TOTAL 8,222 221 66 8,509

Table 63: 2028 Proposed Car Parking Allocation with easyLand Multi-Storey Car Park

LOCATION STANDARD DISABLED PRIORITY TOTAL

Short-Term 1,087 33 2,620

Short -Term Multi-storey 1,500

Mid-Term 2,443 70 2,513

Long-Term 4,378 118 4,496

OVERALL TOTAL 9,408 221 9,629

11.6.8 The comparison of existing passenger parking with proposed future provision by 2028 is provided in Table 66.

Table 64: 2028 Proposed Car Parking Allocation with Short Term Multi-storey Car Park

LOCATION 2012 2028 BALANCE

Short-Term 1,059 2,620 +1,561

Mid-Term 2,301 2,513 +212

Long-Term 3,359 4,496 +1,137

OVERALL TOTAL 6,719 9,629 2,910

11.6.9 Overall these more immediate proposals will deliver a further 2,910 spaces to provide a revised overall total of 9,629 spaces compared with existing.

11.6.10 The requirement at 18mppa by 2028 is calculated at an overall total of 10,221 spaces. This assumes a determining parameter for absolute maximum occupancy of 95% across all three at any point and leads to a forecast for a potential additional requirement at the Airport of 592 spaces.

11.6.11 In addition to public car parking at 18mppa, an additional 706 new spaces for staff car parking has been identified, comprising of 672 to directly replace car parking lost due to the proposed development work in the CTA area and around the new RSS Enterprises development plus a further 34 for projected growth in staff numbers, after allowing for projected modal shift. LLAOL has identified pockets of available land that could be developed to create a potential 336 additional staff car parking spaces on existing Airport land at various locations.




98

11.6.12 Taking account of the Surface Access Strategy objective of encouraging more than 40% of passengers to use public transport by 2017, the parking space available on the site and a number of off-airport parking facilities, there is no need at this time to provide additional parking capacity on site; above that which is already planned.

11.6.13 As the airport grows however, it is highly important that the correct range of parking options is provided for customers and staff and that the situation is managed effectively. The precise mix needed will change over time and LLAOL constantly monitors this and adjusts the parking facilities accordingly. In terms of monitoring staff car parking this is the focus of the Employee Travel Plan that accompanies this Transport Assessment.

11.6.14 For public car parking a sophisticated reservation and revenue management system is employed, which is necessary as over the last ten years the U.K. parking market has changed substantially with a continued trend towards pre-booking. This trend has resulted in three quarters of LLA’s occupancy coming via the pre-booked channel where the customer makes a reservation in advance of arrival at the Airport; the other quarter is made up from gate traffic where no booking is made.

11.6.15 A combination of historical data, forward occupancy forecasting, booking volumes and pace analysis is used to actively manage which products and car parks are purchased by our customers. This practice allows the Airport to achieve operational occupancy of over 99%, while ensuring that customers that have not pre-booked can always be accommodated.

11.6.16 It will continue to do this and if further parking capacity is needed on site in the future, for example by the provision of decked or multi-storey parking, this will be provided in a timely manner and a further planning application(s) will be made at the appropriate time.

11.6.17 Proposals to open up land for some additional space for car parking is included at this time to offset areas lost due to the need to provide airside improvements in the form of new taxiways and stands. It is not yet clear where any future requirement for further car parking would best be provided, should it prove necessary – this could be on the current short, medium or long term parking area and also needs to relate to the quantum of off-site parking space.

11.6.18 The applicant is willing to discuss and enter into an agreement about the scope and nature of monitoring and reporting on car park occupancy and the triggers for the provision of additional on-site parking space.




99

12 FUTURE HIGHWAY NETWORK ASSESSMENT

12.1 Study Area

12.1.1 The complexity of the traffic movements at the CTA and the relatively close spacing of junctions in its immediate hinterland meant that a network modelling exercise was required to allow for the traffic interaction between junctions to be assessed. Following discussions with the highway and planning authority (Luton Borough Council) and the Highways Agency, the agreed Study Area to be modelled as a network was defined as the East Luton Corridor (ELC) from Junction 10 of the M1 to the CTA inclusive, including all junctions thereon and also incorporating the Kimpton Road/ A505/ (old) Airport Way roundabout. This is shown in APPENDIX B Figure B 10.

12.1.2 In view of known capacity issues associated with the current arrangement serving the CTA during busy times at present it has been assumed that the CTA configuration discussed earlier in 2.2.6 above are in place.

12.1.3 To increase the robustness of the network modelling and make allowance for alternative approaches north of the Airport, the modelled area was extended to incorporate the A505, Eaton Green Road, Percival Way and Frank Lester Way as far as the following junctions, inclusive (junction numbers refer to the annotations on Figure B 6 in APPENDIX B):

• A505 Vauxhall Way / Eaton Green Road / Harrowden Road (6);

• Eaton Green Road / Frank Lester Way (7);

• Frank Lester Way / Percival Way / President Way (8).

12.1.4 Furthermore, outside this modelled area four other junctions were considered in isolation to allow for capacity issues raised by Luton residents and Hertfordshire County Council. These were:

• A505 Vauxhall Way / Crawley Green Road (9);

• A505 Stopsley Way / A5228 Hitchin Road / A505 Vauxhall Way (10);

• A505 Stopsley Way / A505 Hitchin Road / Ashcroft Road (11);

• Eaton Green Road / Wigmore Lane (12).

12.1.5 These four junctions, all roundabouts, were excluded from the VISSIM network modelling but were assessed using junction analysis software. The modelling is described in Section 6.10.

12.1.6 Note from 6.6.1 above that the agreed area of network modelling comprised two separate parts: from Junction 10 of the M1 to the Gipsy Lane junction inclusive; and from east of the Gipsy Lane junction to the CTA inclusive. The reason for this distinction was that the former area had recently been modelled on behalf of LBC to assess improvements to Junction 10A of the M1 spur, and had been approved accordingly by both LBC and the HA. As such, it was agreed with LBC and the HA that this model, henceforth referred to as the ‘LBC model’ would be used as the basis for the current TA, for that section of the corridor. This is described in more detail in Section 12.8 below.

12.2 Assessment Framework

12.2.1 The LLAOL VISSIM Model for the CTA and eastern end of the ELC incorporated Junctions 1-8 in Table 9. The existing LBC model was also coded in VISSIM. The four junctions (9-12) to the north were not part of the VISSIM network, and were analysed in isolation using the roundabout analysis program ARCADY.




100

12.2.2 VISSIM is a ‘microscopic’ traffic flow simulation that models the passage of individual vehicles through a network and the interactions between them. It is based on a car-following algorithm and lane change logic, and can analyse vehicular traffic including bus, pedestrian and bicycle operations under constraints such as lane configuration, traffic composition, traffic signals, bus stops and parking.

12.2.3 VISSIM does not follow the conventional link/node modelling system (such as used by a typical assignment model) but uses instead the actual road geometry to enable a faithful representation of the network, even for complex arrangements. It permits the use of different traffic controls (signals, priority, roundabouts etc) anywhere in the model, and can therefore be customised to represent individual and ‘non-standard’ layouts better and in finer detail than more conventional models.

12.2.4 VISSIM also incorporates random elements that are applied using distributions. For example, where a network input flow is specified over a particular time period, VISSIM will randomise the delivery rate of vehicles and the overall flow in accordance with a normal distribution. A similar approach is taken with all such variable aspects of the model: times to negotiate barriers, gap acceptance times at junctions, arrival rates of pedestrians at crossings, etc.

12.2.5 Since therefore a single run of such a specific model can only represent a particular set of conditions, akin to a particular day’s traffic, it is necessary to run each scenario several times with different randomisation factors, and then average the results to gain a more general ‘average’ picture. Here, 10 differently-randomised runs were averaged for each scenario to estimate prevailing, rather than specific, conditions. The individual runs are however still useful in their own right to provide an indication of reliability, giving the range of results and informing the probability of certain events, e.g. congestion, occurring.

12.2.6 VISSIM was therefore a highly appropriate tool for the evaluation of the combination of complex geometry and traffic controls that are operationally required within the study area, and within the CTA itself where barrier controls, pedestrian crossings, and various different types of directional vehicular traffic relating to air passengers, airport employees, taxis, buses, freight and parking are necessary, all of which were modelled discretely.

12.2.7 VISSIM was applied in ‘fixed matrix’ mode. This assumes there is no re-routeing in response to congestion. The reason this was used as opposed to VISSIM’s ‘dynamic routeing’ option was that there is limited route choice on the approaches to the airport, and VISSIM’s inbuilt assumption that all drivers would be familiar with all routes is not realistic. The main alternatives to the north are between the A505 and Percival Way, with the latter discouraged by the airport and probably only familiar to local drivers. From the west, the obvious and signposted approach is along the new Airport Way, with the alternative (via old Airport Way) unlikely to be used.

12.2.8 The actual usage of these alternatives was picked up in the surveys and correctly coded into the base model. The forecast traffic was assumed to be similarly split, which was considered a more reliable approach given the above concerns about allowing VISSIM free rein to estimate routes. VISSIM’s strength is in its highly realistic approach to modelling traffic conditions given a set of flows and a road network; as with most models, it is weaker at predicting route choice due to the general assumptions necessary to do so.

12.2.9 ARCADY is the definitive roundabout analysis tool, and was used to assess the performance of the four outlying junctions to the north of the airport.

12.2.10 Both the VISSIM and ARCADY models were validated in the base year, then had forecast traffic flows applied in the future assessment years. The traffic forecasts for each model were estimated using a consistent set of assumptions, described in Section 12.5.

12.3 Baseline Data

12.3.1 The source of baseline data informing the network testing is described in 6.1 above.




101

12.4 Assessment Years

12.4.1 The assessment years for the LLAOL model were agreed with LBC and the HA. They were:

• Base year 2011;

• Future year 2028.

12.4.2 2011 was taken as the base year, being the most recent complete year from which more information on various airport-related matters was available. While the modelling necessarily used new traffic data from 2012, it was collected early in the year (February) and was therefore expected to be representative of 2011 conditions. This was agreed with LBC and the HA. The future year 2028 represents the time horizon within which the proposed increase in airport activity to 18mppa is planned.

12.4.3 The corresponding years for the LBC model were slightly different, as it already existed and various scenarios had already been run. The base year was 2009, and the future year 2029. It was agreed with LBC that the base year would not be adjusted to 2012, and that 2029 was sufficiently close to 2028 to be an acceptable approximation to it.

12.5 Traffic Growth and Scenario Tests

12.5.1 Traffic growth consisted of three elements:

• Background growth (the increase in traffic not related to the airport scheme; for example through traffic);

• Traffic generated due to specific new local developments other than the airport;

• Traffic generated by the airport expansion that is the subject of this TA.

12.5.2 The background growth and traffic generated due to specific local developments are in principle the same: expected traffic growth not associated with airport expansion. The former consists of growth factors, derived from DfT’s official TEMPRO forecasts, applied to base traffic. TEMPRO factors are based on national projections of new developments in terms of jobs and households and take account of changes in car ownership and mode split. The latter were obtained from more detailed TAs associated with each specific development.

12.5.3 By definition, the TEMPRO factors will already include the generic effects of development local to the scheme. However where the traffic impacts of this local development can be estimated more accurately by other means, such as TAs, it is standard practice to do so explicitly and then to reduce the TEMPRO factors accordingly to avoid ‘double counting’. This is done by re-calculating the TEMPRO factors having adjusted the district planning assumptions to remove the number of dwellings and jobs already accounted for in the specific developments, so ensuring that overall traffic growth remains aligned with the official TEMPRO projections. It is a way of producing a background traffic forecast that is consistent with TEMPRO but which maximises accuracy in the vicinity of the development in question, in this case the airport expansion.

12.5.4 This was the approach taken here. The specific development traffic was taken from LBC-approved TAs for the developments listed previously in Table 50 and modelled explicitly. The remaining background growth was estimated by applying TEMPRO growth factors to the base non-airport traffic, having first reduced them using the method outlined above.

12.5.5 There are (at least) two aspects of this TA that make it unusual and complex compared to a ‘standard’ TA where the traffic impact of a new stand-alone development is required:

• The Airport already exists. The TA is concerned with its expansion to 18mppa from current throughput (c. 9.5mppa 2011), rather than assessing it as an entirely new development. There is therefore already airport-related traffic on the network that needs to be identified and separated (for analytical purposes) from non-airport traffic. This is important because the estimate of traffic generated by 18mppa is fully synthetic, derived




102

from ATMs, and it is not necessarily the case that current Airport traffic levels and patterns will be maintained and added to by the expansion up to 2028; rather, the total traffic generated by 18mppa will entirely replace the existing traffic generated by 9.6mppa;

• While the focus of Airport traffic is the CTA, significant airport-related traffic has an origin or destination outside the CTA: for example employment locations along Percival Way and Frank Lester Way, and the long-stay car park and ancillary activities via President Way and Prince Way. This makes its identification more complicated than that of the CTA, which by definition is Airport-related as the CTA is a cul-de-sac.

12.5.6 This separation of Airport and non-Airport traffic was necessary to maximise the accuracy of the scenario modelling. Six scenarios were identified for the base and future modelling using the LLAOL model:

• SCENARIO A – 2011: Not a scenario as such but the Base 2011 model representing current conditions; this is for reference and for model validation purposes and is described earlier in this report.

• SCENARIO DM – 2028: Used as a future year reference case and assumes that the Airport currently operates at existing levels (i.e. zero growth) and the schedule of committed development does not proceed. As a consequence only background traffic grows to 2028. It is Scenario B (below) excluding committed development.

• SCENARIO B – 2028: Background growth from 2011 plus committed developments excluding Century Park and also excluding any airport expansion beyond the current Base Year. This determines the incremental effect on the network of background growth to 2028 and the local committed developments. It assumes zero airport expansion and thus includes only current airport traffic at c. 9.6mppa as identified from the base case. Its purpose is to determine conditions on the network by 2028 due to committed developments.

• SCENARIO C – 2028: Background growth from 2011 plus Airport growth to 18mppa (including the proposed Airport approach road dual carriageway improvement) by 2028 excluding any committed developments. This determines the incremental effect on the network of background growth to 2028 and airport expansion to 18mppa. In this scenario, the airport-related traffic is deleted from the base traffic, and replaced by the synthetically-derived estimate of airport traffic at 18mppa from the associated ATMs. (Subtracting the 2011 airport traffic from that of the 18mppa future demand shows the increase in airport traffic that is the subject of this TA).

• SCENARIO D – 2028: Background growth from 2011 plus committed developments (excluding Century park) plus Airport expansion to 18mppa (cumulative effect of (A) and (C)). This represents the highest loading and hence the worst case flow scenario.

• SCENARIO E – 2028: Scenario D plus Century Park (accessed via Airport) sensitivity test at 2028. This adds the effect of Century Park as a sensitivity test, so that the incremental traffic loading due to it can be assessed. This assumes access though the Airport and in particular via the CTA.

12.5.7 In the above list, ‘background growth’ refers to general growth, applied via TEMPRO, such as longer-distance through traffic that is related neither to airport activity nor to committed developments. It is influenced by general wider development and is therefore common to all 2028 scenarios. It has however only been applied to the non-airport element of the 2011 base year traffic.

12.5.8 Scenarios B and C aim to attribute degrees of network loading to airport and non-airport traffic, so that when the two are combined in Scenario D, the relative contributions of each are known.




103

12.5.9 While there is a degree of uncertainty over the specific outcome regarding the final access arrangements serving Century Park, proposals have been put forward by the developer to provide an access road through the CTA and subsequently beneath Airport airside land to link with the proposed development further east. It is outside the scope of this assessment to examine the implications of such a proposal in detail; however, Scenario E has been included to provide a sensitivity test in the event that such a proposal materialises.

12.5.10 The future year scenarios all assume that the Airport development proposals surrounding the improvements to the Airport approach road that offer a dual carriageway with traffic signals managing access at the MTCP access are in place as they are considered important to satisfy an existing need for improvement. As stated in 2.2.6 above it is also assumed that the CTA has been reconfigured to provide a more effective layout.

12.5.11 It was agreed with both LBC and the HA that the above LLAOL model tests would not be necessary with the LBC model, on the condition that the airport-related traffic in the LBC model at the point where it abuts the LLAOL model (i.e. just east of the Gipsy Lane junction) was equal to or lower than that assumed for the LLAOL model. If this were the case, reporting on the most relevant LBC model results already available from M1 Junction 10A option tests would be sufficient to inform the TA for the western section of the ELC. This is explained further in Section 12.8.

12.6 LLAOL VISSIM Micro-Simulation Model

12.6.1 The LLAOL VISSIM model, defined in APPENDIX B Figure B 10 was coded from detailed plans of the road network with the base 2011 traffic information input from surveys.

12.7 Model Validation

12.7.1 The LLAOL model required validating to 2011 conditions, i.e. demonstrating that it could satisfactorily reproduce observed 2011 traffic characteristics, so as to give confidence in its ability to test different forecast scenarios. The empirical data used for this purpose was obtained from surveys carried out in February 2012, including manual classified counts (MCCs), automatic traffic counts (ATCs), queue length surveys and journey time surveys. Validation consisted of comparing model outputs with corresponding observed data, where necessary making calibration adjustments to improve the fit.

12.7.2 The full validation is presented in APPENDIX E. This section summarises the results.

12.8 LBC VISSIM Micro-Simulation Model

12.8.1 The LBC VISSIM model, covering the defined area in APPENDIX B Figure B 10 was commissioned by LBC to assess improvement options for M1 Junction 10A, which is located at the end of the M1 spur that forms the western end of the ELC. The existing roundabout has insufficient capacity to accommodate current levels of peak traffic without significant queues forming, and the preferred improvement option was to replace it with an all-movement Grade Separated Junction. For the purposes of this TA, this scheme was assumed to be necessary irrespective of the airport expansion. This approach is considered reliable and agreed with both LBC and the HA.

12.8.2 The LBC model is based on 2009 data, with forecast years of 2014, 2021 and 2029. There are three modelled periods: AM 08:00-09:00, an inter-peak average hour and the PM 17:00-18:00. As with the LLAOL model, it used a combination of specific developments and TEMPRO to allow for traffic growth. The specific developments were identical to those of this TA, as described in Section 10 above, other than for the airport where LBC assumed expansion to 21mppa. This forecast was termed the ‘Full Development Scenario’ (FDS), and was used to assess the operation of the new GSJ.




104

12.8.3 LBC also used a lower growth scenario for their ‘Do-Minimum’ (without Junction 10A improvement) based on TEMPRO growth factors only, as the FDS levels of traffic caused unrealistically high congestion in the Do-Minimum and it was concluded that the level of growth associated with this traffic could not be sustained without the improvement to Junction 10A. Since this TA assumes that M1 Junction 10A will be improved, the 2029 AM and PM peak FDS results were the appropriate ones to report in this TA.

12.8.4 The LBC model included AM, PM and Inter Peak traffic generation that was agreed for the purposes of assessing committed development impacts and based on the schedule discussed in Chapter 10 above. These were reproduced as Tables 5-8 to 5-15 in the Local Model Validation Report and are reproduced for reference here as Table 65 to confirm the assumed traffic generation. It was noted at the time of the baseline traffic surveys in 2009 that the development at Butterfield was some 60% complete; as a consequence the overall traffic generation figures were adjusted to reflect that position.

Table 65: Schedule of Committed Development – Vehicle Trip Generation

AM Inter Peak PM Committed Development

Arr Dep Arr Dep Arr Dep

Century Park 546 224 713 249 745 250

Napier Park 782 387 455 456 520 817

Eaton Green 121 65 55 53 55 95

Stirling Place 105 81 58 66 58 91

Tech Park, Butterfield* 1,049 (629)

141 (24)

309 (185)

291 (175)

165 (99)

855 (513)

Power Court 193 40 143 285 64 358

Whitbread House 13 10 7 6 15 11

Stockwood Park 412 85 104 111 85 412

ORIGINAL TOTALS 3,221 1,033 1,844 1,517 1,707 2,889

Adj. TOTAL for Butterfield 2,801 916 1,720 1,401 1,641 2,547

* 60% reduced flow shown in brackets to reflect built status of Butterfield in 2009

12.8.5 With the adjustment for Butterfield the committed development was forecast to generate some 3,717 AM and 4,188 PM peak hour two-way trips and these were assigned to the surrounding highway network within the LBC VISSIM model.

12.9 Wider Network Impacts

12.9.1 For the testing regime for other junctions within scope of this assessment beyond the VISSIM model areas please refer to 6.10 above.




105

13 VISSIM NETWORK IMPACTS

13.1 Link Capacities

13.1.1 In 6.4 above an assessment was provided to illustrate existing link capacities for key road sections within the study area. This exercise was repeated for 2028 with Scenario B, C, and D traffic conditions to provide an indication of future year link operations. The comparison of AM and PM highway peak hour results for Base Year and Scenario B, which excludes Century Park Traffic, are presented in Table 66.

Table 66: Study Area Link Capacity Assessment - Base and 2028 Scenario B Conditions

BASE YEAR Link Assessment

2028 SCENARIO B Background Growth

+ Comm Dev

SIT

E

LOCATION

TA

79

/99

C

AP

AC

ITY

AM PM AM PM

322 (NB) 292 (SB) 389 (NB) 307 (SB) 2

AIRPORT WAY (Between A505 & Percival Way)

UAP3 1,300 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00

778 (NB) 645 (NB) 823 (NB) 746 (NB) 3

A1081 AIRPORT WAY (ELC) (SW of Holiday Inn roundabout)

UAP1 3,600 06:00-07:00 17:00-18:00 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00

1,397 (SB) 1,465 (NB) 1,898 (SB) 2,083 (NB) 4

A505 VAUXHALL WAY (N of Kimpton Road)

UAP3 1,300 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

686 (NB) 682 (SB) 882 (SB) 797 (NB) 5

PERCIVAL WAY (Between Prospect & Provost)

UAP4 900 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00

775 (WB) 952 (EB) 1,414 (WB) 1,479 (EB) 6

EATON GREEN ROAD (East of Lalleford Road)

UAP3 1,300 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

1,069 (SB) 1,059 (NB) 1,360 (SB) 1,447 (NB) 7

A505 VAUXHALL WAY (Immed N Crawley Green Rd)

UAP2 1,470 07:00-08:00 16:00-17:00 07:00-08:00 16:00-17:00

1,219 (SB) 1,225 (NB) 1,751 (SB) 1,745 (NB) 8

A505 BEECH HILL (Immed N Butterfield Bus’ Park)

UAP1 3,600 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

13.1.2 By 2028 with Scenario B the growth in background traffic supplemented by the Committed Development flows (excluding Century Park), is expected to lead to increased pressure on some important links on the local road network. Present peak period traffic volumes suggest that the A505 Vauxhall Way north of Kimpton Road can present the characteristics of a link under stress.

13.1.3 With Scenario B in place, widening to deliver additional capacity is very likely to be warranted, with a high potential for two lanes in each direction when the circumstances are related to adjacent future junction capabilities. The PM peak figures for the A505 north of Crawley Green Road also imply a probable need to plan for increased capacity, with Eaton Green Road forecast to face a similar requirement. Both have predicted future year flows that suggest the need for widening and additional lanes to sustain link effectiveness.

13.1.4 It should be noted that Scenario B excludes development flows associated with Century Park for reasons discussed earlier in this report. Traffic generated by this additional committed development would add further demand to the situation, although the exact proportion could vary depending on the final access solution, which would impact on traffic distribution.

13.1.5 For comparison Table 67 provides the forecast link flows for Scenarios C and D.




106

Table 67: Study Area Link Capacity Assessment - 2028 Scenario C & D Conditions

2028 SCENARIO C Background Growth + Airport Expansion

2028 SCENARIO D Background Growth

+ Comm Dev. + Airport Expansion S

ITE

LOCATION

TA

79

/99

C

AP

AC

ITY

AM PM AM PM

705 (NB) 574 (SB) 702 (NB) 572 (SB) 2

AIRPORT WAY (Between A505 & Percival Way)

UAP3 1,300 05:00-06:00 16:00-17:00 05:00-06:00 16:00-17:00

1,695 (NB) 1,309 (NB) 1,692 (NB) 1,300 (NB) 3

A1081 AIRPORT WAY (ELC) (SW of Holiday Inn roundabout)

UAP1 3,600 05:00-06:00 16:00-17:00 05:00-06:00 16:00-17:00

1,682 (SB) 1,864 (NB) 1,896 (SB) 2,137 (NB) 4

A505 VAUXHALL WAY (N of Kimpton Road)

UAP3 1,300 07:00-08:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

1,182 (SB) 1,173 (NB) 1,169 (SB) 1,159 (NB) 5

PERCIVAL WAY (Between Prospect & Provost)

UAP4 900 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

1,522 (WB) 1,647 (EB) 1,646 (WB) 1,800 (EB) 6

EATON GREEN ROAD (East of Lalleford Road)

UAP3 1,300 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00

1,355 (SB) 1,467 (NB) 1,429 (SB) 1,648 (NB) 7

A505 VAUXHALL WAY (Immed N Crawley Green Rd)

UAP2 1,470 07:00-08:00 16:00-17:00 07:00-08:00 16:00-17:00

1,662 (SB) 1,633 (NB) 1,808 (SB) 1,884 (NB) 8

A505 BEECH HILL (Immed N Butterfield Bus’ Park)

UAP1 3,600 07:00-08:00 16:00-17:00 08:00-09:00 16:00-17:00

13.1.6 In some cases when comparing the output for Table 66 with Table 67 there is a notable change between scenarios in terms of when the highest flow is anticipated to occur. Accepting these time differences, a direct comparison of AM and PM highest flows for Scenario B with those for Scenario D provides a broad indication of the Committed and proposed Airport development’s contribution to the additional link flows. This is revealed by reference to Table 68.

Table 68: Comparative Link Flow Change and Impact

Committed Devel (B-Base) Proposed Airport (D-B) SITE

AM PM AM PM

2 +67 +15 +313 +265

3 +45 +101 +869 +554

4 +501 +618 0 +54

5 +196 +115 +287 +362

6 +639 +527 +232 +321

7 +291 +388 +69 +201

8 +532 +520 +57 +139

13.1.7 The comparative suggests that when compared with the Airport only results the most significant impact for links 4, 6, 7 and 8 will emerge from the addition of the Committed Development traffic. The Airport has relatively higher impact in relation to links 2, 3 and 5. When Airport traffic is added to the background and committed development for 2028 links 2, 3 and 8 are still expected to operate within capacity.




107

13.1.8 Irrespective of further Airport expansion the forecast flows suggest that by 2028 the influence of background plus committed development traffic would justify the need for consideration of additional network capacity along links 4 and 6 and potentially 5 and 7 will be necessary to cater for future growth. Forecast Airport growth would add further traffic to these links to varying degrees, although the main impact is likely to be experienced on links 5 and 6 and to a lesser degree link 7.

13.2 VISSIM Results

13.2.1 The VISSIM results for the LBC model are given first, as the key findings from this relate to the Gipsy Lane junction and the amount of eastbound airport traffic that is delivered to the east of the junction, into the LLAOL model study area, and the supply of airport traffic in the opposite direction.

13.2.2 The LLAOL forecast airport traffic figures were less than the corresponding flows in the LBC model, so it was not necessary to commission new LBC model runs. The figures in question are provided in Table 69. Note that the table compares the increase in flows above 2012 levels rather than total airport traffic, since this was the more readily-available comparator from the LBC forecasting report.

Table 69: Comparison of Future Increase in Airport Traffic East of Gipsy Lane Junction

DIRECTION HOURLY PERIOD LBC Flow (Vehs) LLAOL Flow (Vehs)

AM 08:00-09:00 525 243 To Airport (eastbound)

PM 17:00-18:00 716 387

AM 08:00-09:00 553 170 From Airport (westbound)

PM 17:00-18:00 617 545

NB LBC flows are 2029 and 21mppa; LLAOL are 2028 at 18mppa (excluding Century Park access traffic)

Flows show increase in Airport traffic above current 2012 levels; not total airport traffic

13.2.3 This confirms that the LBC model has higher flows at the interface between the two models than those of the LLAOL model, thus rendering any further bespoke runs of the LBC model unnecessary. Given this outcome, a summary of the general results from this model is given below prior to reporting in greater detail the LLAOL model results.

13.2.4 To examine the early morning peak Airport demand URS was provided with traffic count data for M1 J10a and used in the LBC VISSIM assessment by Luton Borough Council via its consultant. This included ATC data on London Road north of the junction, A1081 south of the junction and Airport Way east of the junction. All data was collected in Autumn 2010. These sites were combined to provide an overview of hourly junction throughput and in particular to generate a factor of throughput for the period 05:00-06:00hrs that represents the early morning Airport peak compared with the LBC VISSIM hour or 08:00-09:00hrs. The exercise generated a factor of 0.384.

13.2.5 Using total traffic throughput from the M1 J10a Major Scheme Appraisal model, the relative impact of the airport was assessed for 2029, with the factor applied to determine the total junction throughout for the period 05:00-06:00hrs. During this hour forecast Airport traffic accounts for 49% of the total junction throughput (3,451 total vehicles). This compares with the highway peak hours of 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs when the Airport accounts for only 4% and 8% respectively. Crucially the total vehicle throughput predicted at the junction in each of these peak Highway hours is at least 260% greater than during the 05:00-06:00hrs period, confirming that while this very early morning Airport traffic demand is relatively high, the revised J10a design should be more than capable of accommodating future airport traffic in a 18mppa scenario.




108

13.3 LBC VISSIM Model

13.3.1 The LBC model was run for 2029 with 28.5% background growth plus the effects of the committed developments, with no compensation for them in the background traffic, leading to a demand scenario that tended to the side of caution, i.e. the high side. This was the ‘Full Development Scenario’ (FDS) that was only considered achievable in association with the improvement to Junction 10A.

13.4 Summary of 2029 Full Development Scenario results from LBC VISSIM model

13.4.1 The Full Development Scenario (FDS) was run assuming the Junction 10A improvement to be in place. This consists of two roundabouts, one north and one south of Airport Way, linked by a grade-separated road running underneath. Each roundabout has an on- and off-slip to Airport Way, making all turning movements possible.

13.4.2 At Junction 10A, the grade-separation means that Airport Way runs unimpeded through the junction, unless tailbacks down the two off-slips reach the main line.

13.4.3 At the northern roundabout, modelled average queues were very slight in the AM peak period 08:00-09:00hrs, with the highest being 13 vehicles on the Airport Way westbound off-slip approaching the northern roundabout. Modelled maximum queues on each of the three approaches to the northern roundabout peaked at some 120 vehicles, which in the case of the eastbound off-slip could temporarily impede the main eastbound carriageway, but the low average queues indicate that these are transient effects and do not cause unrecoverable congestion.

13.4.4 At the southern roundabout, the average queues are negligible on all three approaches. Maximum modelled queues are also low, except for that of the London Road northbound arm, where the maximum value was some 160 vehicles. The maximum queue modelled on the westbound off-slip was 80 vehicles, which is unlikely to adversely affect the westbound main line.

13.4.5 At Gipsy Lane, the improved Junction 10A delivers more traffic to the junction as the regulating effect of the unimproved Junction 10A ceases, and queues that previously formed on the M1 spur eastbound are allowed through. This places greater strain on the Gipsy Lane junction. In the AM peak, the average and maximum modelled queues are shown in Table 70.

Table 70: LBC Modelled Queues at Gipsy Lane Junction with 2029 FDS (AM peak)

QUEUE (Vehicles) APPROACH

Average Queue Maximum Queue

From Gipsy Lane 315 556

From Airport Way (E) 17 140

From Airport Way (W) 81 388

13.4.6 This shows that queues on Gipsy Lane itself are severe, averaging over 300 vehicles and peaking at over 500. Queues on the Airport Way approaches are much less, although the inbound average queue at 80 vehicles is still significant. While it may be that there are further optimisation adjustments that could be made to the signals, it is unlikely that they would make a large difference and these results indicate that the junction is under considerable stress in 2029.




109

13.4.7 Corresponding PM peak results from the LBC model indicate a high degree of congestion, due to the M1 Junction 10 and Gipsy Lane junction becoming severely overloaded such that the final output results cannot necessarily be assumed to be meaningful; the message models provide in these circumstances is that the network is generally over-capacity, and quoting final queue lengths or throughputs is not usually helpful. Furthermore, the likelihood is that drivers would not tolerate these conditions on a day-to-day basis and some would actively seek to make alternative plans.

13.4.8 This leads into a significant caveat on the LBC model. In line with most TAs its FDS has assumed a worst case for highway traffic, combining highway-only traffic from all background growth, committed developments, and airport expansion up to 21mppa. LBC recognises that the conditions arising from these forecast flows may in reality be likely to be less severe, as in practice there would be scope for drivers who would otherwise be regularly faced with these conditions to re-route, change mode, re-time their trips – even move house or job in the longer term – which are not allowed for in the current model specification.

13.4.9 Our understanding is that the next phase of the LBC model development will therefore be to link it with the Central Bedfordshire multi-modal model to address this limitation and provide an improved assessment of the highway demand having taken some of these considerations into account. This exercise is however not programmed to be started within the timeframe of this TA, and the assumption to be used with the LBC model results is that they represent a worst case traffic loading scenario.

13.5 LLAOL VISSIM Model

13.5.1 The demand scenarios set out in Section 12.5.6 represent incremental increases or changes in demand that help to inform the degree to which the various elements of traffic generation contribute to the 2028 traffic conditions. The following sections outline the main results of each scenario according to the LLAOL VISSIM model, highlighting the points at which junctions become overloaded and the likely causes.

13.5.2 As before, junction numbers refer to the key in Appendix B Figure B6, and the definitions of those included in the LLAOL VISSIM model are reiterated here:

1. The CTA Roundabout;

2. The CTA STCP / DOZ / south employee access roundabout;

3. CTA approach / MTCP T-junction;

4. New/old Airport Way / Percival Way / CTA approach (Ibis) roundabout;

5. Kimpton Road / old Airport Way / A505 roundabout;

6. A505 Vauxhall Way / Eaton Green Road / Harrowden Road;

7. Eaton Green Road / Frank Lester Way;

8. Frank Lester Way / Percival Way / President Way.

13.5.3 For clarity, junctions with no noteworthy issues are omitted from the commentaries. As mentioned in section 6.8, there are some current issues that were identified on the road network in the survey data and base models. As no remediation schemes were identified aside from M1 Junction 10a, these issues are expected to become worse as traffic increases in the future year scenarios.




110

13.5.4 VISSIM does not use the concept of saturation flow or capacity as a fixed input to constrain traffic flows. Effective capacities in VISSIM are implied as a consequence of the geometry, speeds, vehicle interactions and traffic volumes (exactly as in real life) and they are not estimated as an output. Hence traditional measures of performance such as the Volume Over Capacity Ratio cannot be presented. The standard guide to junction performance is therefore the presence or otherwise and magnitude of queue lengths recorded plus journey times, and the network assessment that follows is based on this approach. One advantage of this is that VISSIM monitors and reports average and maximum queues entirely consistently, as it is not subject to the subjectivity associated with estimating queue lengths from surveys. As noted above the definition used here for a queue is where vehicles are moving at less than 10mph.

13.5.5 A full set of results is provided in Appendix J, consisting of:

• Maximum queue lengths;

• Travel times to and from the CTA;

• A detailed summary of flows, average delays, average queues and maximum queues by turn at each junction during each hour.

13.5.6 The AM descriptions below generally refer to the 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs hours as typically the ‘worst cases’, unless otherwise stated. Table 71 to Table 74 after the commentary below provide the headline average queue lengths. VISSIM also records the maximum queue lengths, and these are provided along with all information for each modelled hour in Appendix J.

13.6 SCENARIO A – 2012 Base Year

13.6.1 These are observed queues; the remaining scenarios for 2028 are modelled. It is worth noting from Appendix E (validation) that the 2012 observed queues are slightly overestimated in the model, but this is due partly to the complications of comparing them on a consistent basis. All modelled 2028 queues are entirely compatible with each other.

13.6.2 AM peak: there is slight queuing on Eaton Green Road westbound at Junction 6, up to some 50m, and on the A505 southbound approach.

13.6.3 PM peak: the main issue is queuing on the Airport Way (southern) approach to Kimpton Roundabout Junction 5; however none is generally over 50m.

13.7 SCENARIO DM – 2028, No Committed Development, No Airport Growth

13.7.1 This scenario, standing for ‘Do Minimum’, consists of just background traffic growth not specifically related to either the committed developments or the airport. It is the first stage of the incremental traffic loading scenarios that were modelled to help attribute traffic conditions to the different generators.

13.7.2 AM peak: By 07:00hrs queuing occurs on Eaton Green Road westbound at Junction 6 due to the increased flows on the A505 southbound. By 08:00hrs the queue peaks at over 400m, tailing back to Eaton Green Road through the Frank Lester Way mini roundabout (Junction 7) which in turn causes fluctuating queuing on Frank Lester Way and on Percival Way (Junction 8). Queuing also occurs on the A505 southbound at Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5), but at some 200m does not tail back to Junction 6. Although these queues do not clear by 09:00hrs (the end of the AM modelled period) they do subside with an easing of traffic flows.




111

13.7.3 These queues are triggered by the high southbound flow on the A505, at well over 1,000 vehicles going straight on at Junction 6 between 07:00 and 08:00hrs. There is little to oppose this through-flow at the roundabout – for example, very little circulating flow across it from Harrowden Road turning right – so traffic merging from Eaton Green Road cannot find sufficient gaps. This is made worse by the funnelling of the southbound traffic from two lanes to one just south of Junction 6, which leads to traffic moving slowly across the roundabout in front of the Eaton Green Road entry. At Junction 5, circulating traffic from Kimpton Road and Airport Way (South) does impede the A505 southbound traffic and a queue forms on the A505 itself.

13.7.4 PM peak: Throughout the three hour modelled period, significant queuing (over 700m) occurs on the northbound Airport Way approach to Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5), where there is a strong straight-through flow peaking at over 1,200 vehicles between 17:00 and 18:00hrs. Although these queues ease by the end of the period, there is a significant residual queue on the eastbound approach to this junction at the end of the PM period. Slight queuing also occurs on the A505 northbound at Eaton Green Roundabout (Junction 6) between 17:00 and 18:00hrs due to higher northbound flows during this hour. This is effectively the opposite of the AM conditions, which shows the high degree of tidality in traffic flows in this location.

13.7.5 Scenario DM demonstrates that incorporating background traffic growth only – i.e. with no airport expansion beyond the current level, and no local committed development – serves to increase the severity of queues observed in the base year, affecting particularly Junctions 5 and 6, with 6 in turn affecting 7. These increases are triggered by the relatively high tidal flow on the A505. As would be expected, these flows do not have a significant impact on the Percival Way Roundabout (Junction 4), which is associated with predominantly airport traffic that is assumed not to increase in this scenario.

13.8 SCENARIO B – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development

13.8.1 This scenario is equivalent to the DM with the addition of committed development traffic. It therefore still assumes zero airport expansion beyond current levels, and its purpose is to highlight the incremental effect of adding the committed development to the background traffic growth.

13.8.2 AM Peak: As would be expected from adding more traffic to the DM scenario, the model again reports queues forming on the eastern approach to the A505 / Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6) from 06:00hrs onwards. As before, these queues are caused by the lack of opportunity for vehicles to exit Eaton Green Road. In this scenario the queues are further exacerbated by the bottleneck effect created by the two-to-one lane merges on the A505 southbound (just south of Junction 6). This limits southbound traffic throughput as drivers attempt to unite into one lane and causes the A505 traffic to queue across Junction 6, effectively blocking the Eaton Green Road entry.

13.8.3 Queues on the eastern arm of Junction 6 again tail back to Frank Lester Way, which is why they are similar in length to those of the DM on this section of road. They are however considerably longer on the eastbound approach to the Frank Lester Way mini roundabout (Junction 7) at nearly 300m by the end of the period, and unlike those of the DM, the queue shows no sign of recovery by 09:00hrs.

13.8.4 To the south, by 07:30hrs a queue begins to build on the southbound A505 approach to Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5), due to the relatively high volumes of traffic at this junction and in response to the A505 southbound becoming saturated. As this northern approach to the roundabout has three lanes, junction capacity issues would seem unlikely; however, because the upstream carriageway is single lane and heavily loaded, traffic entering the roundabout cannot exceed the saturation flow of the single lane feeder section and not all the junction capacity is invoked.




112

13.8.5 In general, the addition of committed development exacerbates all the queues noted in Scenario DM, in terms of average length and rate of growth; it also adds some new ones. Queues at Junctions 5, 6, 7 and 8 become severe, initiated largely by the increased southbound flow on the A505 and correspondingly limited effective capacity

23 of Eaton Green

Road on the westbound approach to Junction 6, and the start of queuing on the A505 northbound at Junction 5. Slight queuing begins at the Percival Way Roundabout. Apart from the increased severity, a significant difference between these results and those of the DM is that most of the queues show no signs of recovery by the end of the period, but continue to increase or remain similar, as the higher traffic levels erode the resilience of the network to recovery.

13.8.6 PM peak: As with the DM scenario, the main queue in the PM peak occurs on the southern approach to Kimpton Road roundabout and remains throughout the modelled PM period. Traffic flow from the south is significant and with the road feeding traffic onto this approach provided as only a single lane, throughput is restricted. Queues tail back beyond the Gipsy Lane junction, some 750m away.

13.8.7 Although queuing, the arrival rate of traffic from this southern arm is fairly constant, so vehicles approaching from the west of Junction 5 along Kimpton Road are not able to find many suitable gaps. Consequently, a queue begins to form here from 16:30hrs and increases to some 700m by 19:00hrs, the end of the modelled PM period, showing no signs of recovery by then.

13.8.8 As with the DM average queues at the other junctions are minor, although as Appendix J shows they can reach significant transient maximum lengths.

13.8.9 Scenario B shows that with background growth and committed development, but with no change to current airport traffic figures, the level of queuing becomes serious, with the central issue being the capacity of the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5), and to a lesser extent the Eaton Green Roundabout (Junction 6) and the A505 in between and to the south. Thus even without any airport expansion, the model predicts serious congestion with just background and committed development traffic by 2028.

Revisions to A505/ Kimpton Road Junction

13.8.10 From the VISSIM results for Scenario B described above, the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5) was identified as a key restraint on the effective operation of the local network, which would need to be addressed as the likelihood is that it could not sustain predicted non-airport growth in its current form. To determine potential improvements necessary to satisfy the schedule of background traffic growth and committed development by 2028, a revised junction strategy was tested using traffic signals. The foundation of the initial design was a layout with LinSig traffic signal calculations that were produced by consultants ARUP on behalf of London Luton Airport Limited (LLAL) as part of its earlier Airport masterplan promotion for 18mppa. The drawings and supporting information have been released by LLAL to help inform this assessment and are included for reference as Appendix N.

13.8.11 In view of this need for mitigation, the scenario with traffic signals at Junction 5 was referenced as Scenario B(2); the same demand as B, but with the new signal layout managing the junction. In the tables below, the original Scenario B was re-named B(1), for clarity.

13.9 SCENARIO B(2) – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, Junction 5 Signals

13.9.1 As noted above, this scenario uses the same demand traffic as Scenario B(1), but incorporates a signalised improvement to the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5) to address the capacity failings associated with certain movements at this junction.

23

Effective capacity takes account of the effects of other traffic: e.g. the maximum capacity of a roundabout entry may be high if there is zero circulating traffic to give way to, but the effective capacity will be progressively reduced as circulating traffic across the entry increases.




113

13.9.2 AM Peak: The effect of the signals in the AM peak is to slow down the rate that the queue builds-up on the A505 southbound approach to Junction 5, such that it is some 100m by 08:00hrs (compared with c. 450m in B(1)) and some 350m by 09:00hrs (compared with C. 500m in B(1)). This inferior response to the signal improvements in the final AM hour is likely to be due to the link capacity of the single lane again being reached before that of the junction, thus choking the supply and allowing a queue to build up, albeit slower than that of Scenario B(1).

13.9.3 The queue on the eastern approach to the A505 / Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6) is still present, largely unchanged from that of Scenario B(1), as the two-to-one lane merges continue to limit throughput from Eaton Green Road; the initial signal improvements to Junction 5 can do little to improve this.

13.9.4 PM Peak: Queues on the western approach to the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5) are much reduced (down to c. 100m from 400m in Scenario B(1)) in the initial hour of the PM peak, as the signals mean that vehicles on this approach no longer have to give way to the major flow on the A505.

13.9.5 The northern approach to the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5) does however include a large proportion of right turners, which are placed in a segregated right turn lane that often blocks access to the ahead and left lanes, meaning the signals cannot operate efficiently. Eventually the queue from this approach tails back to Eaton Green Road, Frank Lester Way, Percival Way, Old Airport Way and by 17:30hrs causes gridlock.

13.9.6 Queues on the southern approach to the Kimpton Road junction show slight improvement, but continue to tail back beyond Gipsy Lane. This is due to the upstream single lane that feeds the three-lane stopline limiting the throughput of vehicles.

13.9.7 To the north at Junction 6 a queue begins to form on the southern approach, as traffic no longer queuing at Kimpton Road is able to progress northbound to Eaton Green Road, moving the queue further north. By the end of the PM period this queue tails back to Kimpton Road, which causes a queue to form in the left-turn lane on the western approach to the Kimpton Road junction that operates on a give way, so becomes blocked.

13.9.8 Scenario B(2) shows that the application of an isolated improvement to address particular issues helps, but is not sufficient on its own to allow the effects of background growth and committed development traffic to be mitigated, and indeed triggers different issues as the time periods progress. Hence a further improvement was investigated that would work in tandem with the signals.

Further revisions to A505/ Kimpton Road Junction

13.9.9 While Scenario B(2) demonstrated improvements to the traffic flows, it also accentuated the second major constraint in this corridor as the capacity of the A505 itself between Junctions 5 and 6, and south of 5. The results suggested that to maximise the effectiveness of the signalisation, further improvements to the A505 would be needed.

13.9.10 The measures assumed were to dual the A505 between Junctions 5 and 6 in each direction, so that the detrimental effects of the southbound ‘funnel’ and the link capacity constraint noted northbound were alleviated. The ‘package’ of Junction 5 signalisation and dualling between Junctions 5 and 6 was therefore targeting as efficiently as possible the specific weaknesses of the local network that are predicted to occur by 2028 even if the Airport were not to expand.

13.10 SCENARIO B(3) – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, Junction 5 Signals, dualling of the A505 between Kimpton Road and Eaton Green Road

13.10.1 As with Scenario B(2), B(3) uses the same demand traffic as Scenario B(1), but adds localised dualling of the A505 to the B(2) signalised improvement to address the link-based capacity failings associated with the single carriageway itself.




114

13.10.2 AM Peak: Improving the A505 by adding a second lane in both directions improves traffic flow at the Kimpton Road junction (Junction 5) and the Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6). In the southbound direction it removes the bottleneck caused by the merging of two lanes into one, hence allowing westbound vehicles approaching from Eaton Green Road at Junction 6 easier access to the A505. This reduces the maximum average queue (between 08:00 and 09:00hrs) on Eaton Green Road to less than 100 vehicles, compared to the corresponding figure of over 400 vehicles in Scenario B(2).

13.10.3 Two lanes on the A505 southbound also means that the arrival rate of traffic at the stopline on the southbound approach to the Kimpton Road junction has approximately doubled, so more vehicles are able to progress during the green phase. The model predicts that queues on the A505 will reduce from over 300 vehicles by the end of the AM period in Scenario B(2) to less than 100 in B(3).

13.10.4 PM Peak: Queues on the southern approach to the A505 / Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6) are considerably reduced from those of Scenario B(2), due to the additional lane allowing more than one vehicle at a time to exploit suitable gaps in the circulating traffic. There is still a queue that fluctuates, but it does not tail back to Kimpton Road and in all three hours of the modelled peak it is considerably less than that of Scenario B(2), at typically half the length.

13.10.5 The northern approach to the signalised Kimpton Road junction (Junction 5) has a large proportion of right turners, but the addition of an extra lane means the queue to use the segregated right turn lane no longer blocks access to the other lanes at the stopline. This allows the signals to work more efficiently and queues here are greatly reduced throughout the PM modelled period compared to those of Scenario B(2); to less that 100m, from some 900m.

13.10.6 Queues on the southern approach to the Kimpton Road junction remain largely unchanged from those of Scenario B(2) and thus continue to tail back beyond Gipsy Lane. As before this is due to the capacity constraint of the single upstream lane that feeds the three-lane stopline, limiting the throughput of vehicles at the junction. In Scenario B(3) however they do begin to clear by the final modelled hour, unlike those of Scenario B(2) which are still increasing.

13.10.7 Scenario B(3) demonstrates that these improvements together are able to mitigate some of the more serious issues of congestion arising from the level of highway traffic demand predicted from background growth and committed development traffic only. As such, these improvements are assumed to be included in the three remaining scenario tests C, D and E, all involving the expansion of the Airport for the first time in these tests.

13.11 SCENARIO C – 2028, Background Traffic, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Full Mitigation

13.11.1 Initial testing of the Holiday Inn roundabout with Airport growth indicated severe congestion on all approach arms to the degree that the network became unmanageable in the early morning Airport peak. Site and land constraints prevented consideration of an enlarged roundabout and a revised signalised junction was considered the most appropriate remedy. Full mitigation here therefore refers to the improvements set out in Scenario B(3), which would be required with or without Airport growth, plus the signalisation of the Holiday Inn roundabout. The initial traffic signal scheme adopted was taken from a design by Arup, prepared for LLAL independently as part of its 18mppa master planning exercise but subsequently made available for this TA.

13.11.2 The purpose of this scenario is to investigate the effects of Airport expansion plus background growth to 2028 if the committed development does not materialise. Given that background growth is assumed to be inevitable, as it is not dependent on local circumstances, this in effect replaces the irresolute element of committed development traffic of the B Scenarios with Airport expansion prior to combining them all in the worst-case Scenario D. The ‘busy day’ traffic scenario referred to above is based on forecasts for a busy August flight profile.




115

13.11.3 AM Peak: The majority of Airport traffic arrives during the early part of the modelled AM period from ELC and from the M1 via Junction 10 to the extent that a queue forms on the inbound approach to the Holiday Inn roundabout (Junction 4). This queue tails back to the overpass by 05:45hrs, reaching a maximum average length of some 300m between 05:00 and 06:00hrs, and then fairly quickly diminishes as the airport traffic decreases after 06:00. By 06:15hrs this queue has dispersed. It is also worth noting that the airport traffic forecasted is for a busy day, so the queue observed is not likely to occur on a daily basis.

13.11.4 The network remains uncongested until around 07:30hrs when the general (non-airport) peak hour traffic begins to build up. Between 07:00 and 09:00hrs the conditions are generally good, being slightly less busy (in terms of queued traffic) than those of Scenario B(3), suggesting that the Airport traffic has a smaller overall effect than the committed development traffic. The only notable queue to form, which is not as marked in B(3), is on Eaton Green Road at the approach to the Frank Lester Way mini-roundabout (Junction 7). This may be due to the limited link capacity of Eaton Green Road with the increased airport traffic entering from this direction; this is one area where the committed development traffic does not have a significant effect according to the assumed distributions.

13.11.5 PM Peak: There is congestion on the southern approach to the assumed-signalised Kimpton Road junction (Junction 5) but it does not start until around 16:30hrs, nor does it become as severe as it does in any of the ‘B’ scenarios, peaking at some 600m in the middle hour of the PM period. The reason is that in the ‘DM’ and ‘B’ scenarios, congestion at this location is caused mainly by the combined background and committed development traffic. The committed development traffic is not present in Scenario C, and the airport traffic has little cause to use this approach, resulting in better conditions than in the earlier scenarios. There is still sufficient demand to cause a significant queue which tails back to Gipsy Lane by 17:00hrs, but this begins to subside in the final modelled hour.

13.11.6 Queuing occurs on the southern approach to the A505 / Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6) that tails back to Junction 5 after about 18:00hrs, and therefore does not affect the Kimpton Road junction until around 18:00hrs, after which traffic levels begin to decrease and the queue begins to shorten.

13.11.7 From 17:00 to 18:00hrs a queue forms on the Percival Way approach to the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4). This is due to the relatively large amount of Airport related traffic heading to this junction from Prince’s Way, President’s Way and Percival Way. As Percival Way is a single carriageway link it quickly becomes saturated and this restricts the arrival rate at the three lane stopline. This means that the signals do not recognise the heavy demand and the green for this arm is cut-off without necessarily clearing all waiting traffic. It may therefore be possible to achieve a marginal improvement by making adjustments to the signal settings and operation.

13.11.8 Scenario C highlights the effect of the relatively short but high level of Airport traffic activity in the early morning. The network copes well with this pronounced ‘spike’ in demand, with all queues being transient and no single queue exceeding 300m at any location or time during the morning peak. The PM peak operates less effectively, although it is only on the A505 northbound where conditions are significantly worse than in preceding scenarios. The signals at the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4) operate very well with traffic on all approaches except for Percival Way, where throughput is limited more by the upstream single lane approach than by the junction itself.

13.11.9 Generally, comparison of Scenario B(3) results with those of Scenario C show that the committed development has a greater impact on the north-south A505 corridor conditions, while the airport traffic affects the local junctions surrounding it to a greater extent, including Junction 4 but also the east-west traffic at Junction 5. This is to be expected given the locations of the traffic generators and the associated distributions around the local network.




116

13.12 SCENARIO D – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Full Mitigation

13.12.1 This scenario combines all the elements of growth to provide a more exacting test of the network improvements. It combines the assumptions that all committed development will go ahead, although excluding Century Park, in conjunction with peak season busy-day conditions at the Airport. Also, while background growth has been adjusted down to allow for committed developments, the guidance it follows cannot be an exact science and it is likely that it double counts some elements of both the committed development traffic and airport traffic, making this a ‘robust’ assessment in terms of level of demand.

13.12.2 AM Peak: Scenario D represents the addition of committed development traffic to Scenario C; although this has very little impact on the results. Queues are broadly the same as those of Scenario C. The only notable queue is, as in Scenario C, on the ELC approach to the Holiday Inn junction, lasting for about an hour.

13.12.3 As mentioned in Scenario C, the Eaton Green Road eastern approach to the Frank Lester Way mini-roundabout (Junction 7) also becomes congested in the latter half of the period due to the link becoming saturated.

13.12.4 The AM results generally are perhaps not intuitively what would be expected; however, it is due to the Airport and committed development traffic effectively loading different parts of the local network at different times, so that there is not a major compounding of traffic flows. As noted above, the airport traffic peaks earlier than the other traffic, and in this respect there is an element of segregation that avoids more serious congestion.

13.12.5 PM Peak: Congestion on the southern approach to the Kimpton Road junction (Junction 5) builds up from 16:00hrs, tails back to Gipsy Lane and remains present throughout the PM model. It builds up earlier and more quickly than that of Scenario C due to the combined airport and committed development traffic, the arrival of which is not staggered as it is in the AM period.

13.12.6 A slight queue also builds on the western approach to the Kimpton Road junction, although this is generally transient, clearing with each signal cycle.

13.12.7 As in Scenario C, a queue forms on the southern approach to the A505 / Eaton Green Road roundabout (Junction 6) from about 17:00, clearing by 18:00hrs. It is however less severe than that of Scenario C, with a maximum length of just under 300m, and is decreasing by the end of the PM peak period. This reduction in queue length is a direct consequence of an increased queue at upstream junctions, specifically Junction 5 which acts as a bottleneck due to the influence of committed development, in particular Napier Park traffic.

13.12.8 In common with Scenario C, a queue forms on the Percival Way approach to the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4), for the same reasons as in Scenario C. This junction is relatively insensitive to the committed development traffic.

13.12.9 Scenario D shows that the combined effect of all the major development assumptions only has a marginal impact on the AM peak in comparison with that of Scenario C, for the reasons given above – the committed development and Airport traffic do not share common times nor routes, apart from the entry from ELC via Gipsy Lane. Therefore there are only marginal differences between C and D even though the total traffic through the period has increased.

13.12.10 In the PM peak, there is more common ground between the Airport and committed development traffic that lead to significantly increased queues at Junction 5.

13.13 SCENARIO E – 2028, Background Traffic, Committed Development, ‘Busy Day’ Airport Growth to 18mppa, Century Park, Full Mitigation

13.13.1 Scenario E is a sensitivity test on D that includes the Century Park development with access via the Airport approach and the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4). It further adds to the overall network traffic and thus represents the ultimate worst-case scenario for this TA.




117

13.13.2 AM Peak: The addition of Century Park traffic also has only a marginal impact on the operation of the AM peak model relative to Scenario D as the Century Park peak does not coincide with the Airport peak, and there is capacity available for both sets of traffic flows at the times it is required.

13.13.3 The half-hour queue on ELC noted in Scenarios C and D remains in the early part of the period, and neither does the congestion on Eaton Green Road at the Frank Lester Way mini-roundabout change.

13.13.4 PM Peak: Adding Century Park traffic has a negative impact on the operation of the PM peak model as the Century Park peak coincides with the Airport peak, so that Century Park traffic and Airport traffic are exiting the CTA at the same time. On the exit from the airport vehicles wishing to continue onto ELC do so via a segregated lane that does not require vehicles to give way. Vehicles wishing to continue to Old Airport Way or Percival Way must access the signalised junction by merging into the two right-hand lanes. The amount of vehicles wishing to enter the two right-hand lanes increases significantly when Century Park traffic is added, and there is consequently not enough stacking space for these vehicles leading to the formation of a queue that blocks the ELC lanes.

13.13.5 In general the level of queuing in Scenario E resembles that of D only more severe, with new queues also developing. By the end of the PM period there are queues of some 200m or more on all arms of Junction 5, and on all but the old Airport Way approach to Junction 4, as well as ‘new’ queues at Junctions 3 and 8.

13.13.6 Scenario E has levels of traffic that can be accommodated reasonably well in the AM peak, but which begins to push the network beyond its limits in the PM peak. These successive scenario tests show that the AM can absorb greater traffic growth due to the separation of the Airport and other traffic peaks. This separation does not happen in the PM peak and the tests tend to show a gradual increase in queued traffic as the scenarios progress.

13.14 Gipsy Lane Junction

13.14.1 Of the two time periods, the PM peak is the critical one, as it is subject to the highest levels of congestion. A characteristic of the PM peak is that the Gipsy Lane junction forms a constraint to eastbound Airport Way traffic; the queues associated with this approach are shown in the summary tables below since they potentially have a significant effect on the amount of traffic entering the area of interest. Gipsy Lane is the westernmost junction modelled in the LLAOL VISSIM network, and this observation is entirely consistent with the result of the LBC VISSIM model, which also predicted serious problems here in the PM peak.

13.14.2 While there are no particular issues during the morning peak, the figures below show that it is primarily the effect of the committed development traffic that leads to the eastbound queuing at this junction. Between 16:00 and 17:00hrs, there is a queue of approximately 1km in Scenario B(3), 100m in Scenario C, and nearly 2km in Scenario D. The committed development traffic is present in B(3) and D, but not C, where it was replaced by Airport growth traffic. As the PM peak continues, the queue does become longer in Scenario C, but by the end of the period it is still only half that of Scenarios B(3) and D, which both extend back to Junction 10 of the M1. This suggests that the main cause of the queuing is background growth and committed development traffic.

13.14.3 If Scenario D is considered the most ‘realistic’ 2028 snapshot in planning terms, then a considerable amount of traffic will be suppressed due to queuing at Gipsy Lane. Were the junction to be improved, the conditions to the east of Gipsy Lane as reported here may well deteriorate due to the increased arrival rate, and this consideration needs to be borne in mind. The same could be said in principle of other surrounding junctions, but the proximity of the Gipsy Lane junction and the scale of the traffic queues mean that this warrants a separate mention.




118

13.15 Summary Tables – Reported VISSIM Queue Lengths by Scenario

Table 71: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – AM 05:00-06:00hrs

AM 05:00-06:00hrs Average Queue Length (m)

Junc Approach Do Min Scenario

B (1) Scenario

B (2) Scenario

B (3) Scenario

C Scenario

D Scenario

E

MTCP 0 0 0 0 5 5 5

CTA 0 0 0 0 12 14 13 3 Holiday Inn 0 0 0 0 56 59 47

Airport 4 4 4 4 54 54 52

Airport Way 4 4 4 4 292 279 252

Old Airport Way 3 3 3 3 60 54 55 4

Percival Way 1 1 1 2 17 16 15

Kimpton Road 0 0 2 2 7 7 7

Old Airport Way 0 0 3 3 10 9 9

Airport Way 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 5

A505 0 0 4 4 6 6 6

IBC Vans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

A505(N) 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

Harrowden Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

A505(S) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6

Eaton Green Road 4 3 3 1 1 1 1

Eaton Green Rd (E) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Eaton Green Rd (W) 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 7 Frank Lester Way 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Prince Way 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

President Way 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Percival Way 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 8

Frank Lester Way 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

GL Airport Way (E) 6 7 7 226 211 214

Scenario B(1): No mitigation; Scenario B(2): Kimpton Road signals; Scenario B(3): Kimpton Road signals and dualled A505

Table 72: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – AM 08:00-09:00hrs

AM 08:00-09:00hrs Average Queue Length (m)


B (1) Scenario

B (2) Scenario

B (3) Scenario

C Scenario

D Scenario

E

MTCP 0 2 7 0 6 6 5

CTA 0 1 78 0 1 1 2 3 Holiday Inn 0 20 0 0 1 1 1

Airport 3 19 23 3 8 7 19

Airport Way 3 68 26 3 19 17 24

Old Airport Way 3 53 65 7 5 5 16 4

Percival Way 5 19 4 6 26 24 34

Kimpton Road 2 54 70 17 8 19 20

Old Airport Way 16 33 9 15 5 8 12

Airport Way 15 78 99 28 11 22 24 5

A505 58 490 329 80 13 33 36

IBC Vans 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

A505(N) 12 70 65 29 7 25 44


A505(S) 0 52 108 13 3 7 7

6

Eaton Green Road 338 444 440 82 0 2 2

Eaton Green Rd (E) 136 279 270 85 229 209 244


Prince Way 0 2 8 0 0 0 0

President Way 1 8 14 1 41 29 24

Percival Way 12 232 150 3 3 3 4 8


GL Airport Way (E) 71 202 15 18 28 329





119

Table 73: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – PM 17:00-18:00hrs

PM 17:00-18:00hrs Average Queue Length (m)


B (1) Scenario

B (2) Scenario

B (3) Scenario

C Scenario

D Scenario

E

MTCP 0 0 60 0 9 9 49

CTA 0 0 758 0 4 5 944 3 Holiday Inn 0 0 2 0 2 3 13

Airport 6 6 209 7 52 57 180

Airport Way 3 3 1,174 3 59 48 636

Old Airport Way 3 2 585 7 24 20 198 4

Percival Way 1 1 806 2 433 376 928

Kimpton Road 225 678 492 165 77 515 536

Old Airport Way 1 12 3 33 307 414 198

Airport Way 762 772 778 723 596 671 682 5

A505 0 2 987 95 66 102 209

IBC Vans 0 0 35 0 0 0 0

A505(N) 5 9 178 8 5 7 16


A505(S) 126 22 158 140 910 268 89

6


Eaton Green Rd (E) 0 0 301 1 2 3 9


Prince Way 0 0 135 0 1 1 58

President Way 0 0 129 0 11 10 118

Percival Way 20 11 980 14 17 17 356 8


GL Airport Way (E) 2,380 2,341 2,373 1,214 2,365 2,366


Table 74: Average Modelled Queue Lengths – PM 18:00-19:00hrs

PM 18:00-19:00hrs Average Queue Length (m)


B (1) Scenario

B (2) Scenario

B (3) Scenario

C Scenario

D Scenario

E

MTCP 0 0 71 0 16 17 79

CTA 0 0 1,268 0 4 4 1,298 3 Holiday Inn 0 0 11 0 2 2 42

Airport 5 6 215 7 50 41 176

Airport Way 4 3 1,339 3 38 34 429

Old Airport Way 2 1 616 5 27 23 434 4

Percival Way 1 1 985 1 194 141 870

Kimpton Road 267 479 691 21 37 96 223

Old Airport Way 1 4 2 24 200 178 177

Airport Way 628 690 810 557 456 553 603 5

A505 0 1 874 45 39 44 268

IBC Vans 0 0 56 0 0 0 1

A505(N) 3 6 189 5 5 8 22


A505(S) 23 19 260 61 811 133 52

6


Eaton Green Rd (E) 0 0 340 0 1 1 13


Prince Way 0 0 154 0 0 0 27

President Way 0 0 131 0 3 2 46

Percival Way 4 2 978 4 6 6 357 8


GL Airport Way (E) 2,372 2,400 2,356 1,136 2,356 2,367





120

13.16 Travel Times and Delays

13.16.1 Appendix J provides the travel times to the CTA from different parts of the network:

• Gipsy Lane;

• Kimpton Road;

• A505 (N) via Old Airport Way;

• A505 (N) via Percival Way;

• Eaton Green Road (E) via Percival Way.

13.16.2 Gipsy Lane to CTA: In the AM peak, this segment takes approximately two to three minutes in all scenarios and all hours. The main exception is in Scenarios C, D and E, all of which include airport growth and traffic signals at the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4), where the time in the airport’s busiest period (05:00-07:00) is a fairly consistent five minutes. This reflects the transient queues that build up and disperse during the ‘spike’ in the airport traffic occurring during this time.

13.16.3 In the PM peak, the travel times highlight the need for improvements before any airport growth is introduced. In most scenarios, the times are of the order of three minutes. The main exceptions are Scenario B(2), where over all three hours, the minimum travel time is some ten minutes, and the maximum is over 15 minutes (17:00-18:00). This is due to the conditions described in Section 3.9.5, which lead to the queue on the southern approach to the Kimpton Roundabout (Junction 5) permanently queuing back to the diverge from Airport Way, impeding the through-flow towards the CTA. The other exception is Scenario E, where the additional Century Park traffic increases the journey time to 12 minutes by the end of the PM peak.

13.16.4 Kimpton Road to CTA: In the AM peak for scenarios without airport growth, the travel time profiles show a gradual increase from some two minutes in the first hour to up to three minutes in the final hour. With the airport scenarios, this increases to just over four minutes in the hours between 05:00 and 07:00, showing a similar overall pattern to that of the Gipsy Lane to CTA route.

13.16.5 In the PM peak, the patterns are similar to those of the previous route, although generally slightly slower, typically taking five to six minutes. The exceptions are also the same: a large increase in travel time in Scenario B(2), which is triggered by Junction 5, and a progressive increase through the period to approximately 12 minutes when the Century Park traffic is added in Scenario E. A point to note regarding 17:00-18:00 is that the travel time along Kimpton Road is similar in B(2) to that of B(1), even though the B(1) queue is considerably longer. This is down to the vehicles waiting longer for the signals, but in a shorter queue.

13.16.6 A505 (N) via Old Airport Way: In the AM peak, this travel segment takes around three minutes, increasing to about five minutes in the earlier hours of Scenarios C, D and E.

13.16.7 In the PM peak, corresponding times increase to around four minutes, other than for Scenarios B(2) and E; the former is in excess of 15 minutes, the latter peaks at 14 minutes as the addition of Century Park traffic overloads the Holiday Inn junction (Junction 4).

13.16.8 A505 (N) via Percival Way: In the AM peak, this travel segment takes around four minutes, increasing to about five minutes in the earlier hours of Scenarios C, D and E.

13.16.9 In the PM peak, the travel times follow a very similar pattern to those of the previous PM routes, with typical times of five minutes in all scenarios except B(2) and E, which have maximum values of nine and 14 minutes respectively.

13.16.10 Eaton Green Road (E) via Percival Way: In the AM peak, these are very similar to the previous travel segment result since much of the route is common to both, with travel times of some four minutes increasing to five in the early hours of the scenarios that include airport growth




121

13.16.11 In the PM peak, the same applies; journey times of some three minute, but considerably greater in Scenarios B(2) and E.

13.16.12 Generally, the AM travel times do not vary significantly between routes, since (i) all routes have a similar distance, and (ii) there is no appreciable congestion affecting them. Thus the only variation is an increase in travel time to the CTA in the scenarios that include airport growth, and then only in the first and second AM peak modelled hour when the airport demand peaks.

13.16.13 The PM peak travel times are characterised by large increases in Scenario B(2) and E, while the remainder are fairly constant. It is worth noting however that the journey times presented tend not to highlight the markedly more congested conditions in some areas on the network during the PM peak compared to the AM peak. This is mainly because the reported routes to the airport CTA, which are of greater interest to the Airport, avoid some of the longer queues (e.g. the southern approach to Junction 5 and the eastern approach to Junction 6) so these do not show up as particular issues in the journey times. This point is emphasised by the test of roundabout junctions on the wider network described in the following chapter.




122

14 WIDER NETWORK IMPACTS

14.1 Summary of ARCADY Capacity Assessments

14.1.1 For Junctions 9, 10, 11 and 12 and the individual testing Scenarios outlined in 12.5 above the results are presented as a series of Tables and charts coupled with a written summary for critical links. The full results are presented in Appendix J with the ARCADY 7 files included on a CD at the end of the Appendices.

14.1.2 At all junctions there are periods during the AM and PM peak hour testing time that were operating to varying degrees above the desirable 0.85 threshold to suggest junctions approaching capacity.

14.1.3 For comparison with the base situation reported earlier in Section 6.10 and Figure 8, queues from the models for the periods 08:00 to 09:00 and 17:00 to 18:00 periods are presented for reference and comparison as a series of charts to follow each table.

14.2 SCENARIO DM: 2028 Future Year No Committed Development or Airport Growth

14.2.1 The results forecast over capacity issues at all four of the junctions tested. The critical links involved at each were:

• Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road – Crawley Green Road Eastern Approach and Vauxhall Way North (AM). Crawley Green Road Western Approach (PM).

• Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way – A505 Stopsley Way and A5228 Hitchin Road approach (AM). A5228 Hitchin Road (PM).

• Stopsley Way/ Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road - Ashcroft Road (AM). A505 Stopsley Way and Ashcroft Road approach (PM).

• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Western Approach (PM).

Table 75: SCENARIO DM – 2028 Future Year Do Minimum. No Future Airport Growth or Committed Development

AM PM Site


06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00


1.47 1.55 1.12


1.04 1.07 1.22

11 A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Rd/ Ashcroft Road

1.28 1.42 1.10

12 Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Lane/ Wigmore Place

0.99 1.06




123

Figure 24: SCENARIO DM (Junctions 9 to 12) – 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues

14.2.2 In terms of predicted queues the results indicate that even in the absence of any committed or proposed future development there are a number of approach arms at the junctions that are forecast to experience stress, with the likelihood of fairly extensive tailbacks. These mostly involve roads seeking to establish themselves on the A505 Vauxhall Way to also include the A505 Stopsley Way.

14.2.3 The results indicate that future background growth alone will have a significant impact on the operation of these junctions by 2028 and as a consequence remedial attention would be necessary simply to accommodate background traffic growth.

14.3 SCENARIO B – 2028 Future Year Background Traffic + Committed Development


• Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road – Vauxhall Way North and Crawley Green Road Eastern approach (AM). A505 Vauxhall Way South and both Eastern and Western approaches Crawley Green Road (PM).

• Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way – A505 Stopsley Way and A5228 Hitchin Road approach (AM). A505 Vauxhall Way and A5228 Hitchin Road (PM).

• Stopsley Way/ Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Road - Ashcroft Road and A505 Hitchin Road North approach (AM). A505 Stopsley Way and Ashcroft Road approach (PM).

• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Eastern Approach (AM). Eaton Green Road Western Approach (PM).




124

Table 76: SCENARIO B – Background Traffic (2028) with Committed Development (ex. Century Park)

AM PM Site


06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00


1.46 1.57 1.23


1.08 1.17 1.28


1.38 1.62 1.21


1.07 1.19

Figure 25: SCENARIO B (Junctions 9 to 12) 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues

14.3.2 The addition of committed development (excluding Century Park) adds further stress to the network. The result is that in the absence of any significant improvements the predicted queues observed in the Do-Minimum situation above lengthens, accompanied by additional and distinct queues on other approach arms. These can be readily identified at the individual junctions by comparing the two charts. The results suggest that even with the absence of Century Park traffic, the accommodation of Committed Development raises further issues on the network when added to the level of forecast background traffic growth.

14.3.3 Assuming a value of 5.75m per vehicle, a queue of 100 vehicles would equate to a queue length of over 0.5km. The Scenario B results above report a queue of 291 vehicles Crawley Green Road (E) and 288 for Ashcroft Road, that both would translate to a potential queue length in excess of 1.6Km.




125

14.4 SCENARIO C – Background Traffic (2028) + Airport Growth (2028) Only





• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Eastern Approach (AM). Eaton Green Road Western Approach (PM).

Table 77: SCENARIO C - Airport (2028) and Non-Airport (2028) Traffic, excluding All Committed Development

AM PM Site


06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00


1.51 1.61 1.22


1.12 1.18 1.28


1.46 1.57 1.17


1.18 1.38

Figure 26: SCENARIO C (Junctions 9 to 12) 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues




126

14.4.2 The test of Airport growth alone without Committed Development reveals a broadly similar outcome to Scenario B, although the impact is generally less when predicted queues are matched. This would suggest that the impact of Airport growth is broadly similar although by and large lower than that of the Committed Development.

14.4.3 In common with the Committed Development Scenario B, the forecast increase in background traffic is predicted to absorb the network capacity that was potentially available moving forward from the base case 2011. This would suggest that fairly extensive network improvements are required simply to mitigate the forecast increase in background traffic by 2028.

14.5 SCENARIO D – Background + Airport Growth + Committed Development (2028)





• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Eastern Approach (AM).

Table 78: SCENARIO D - Airport (2028) and Non-Airport (2028) traffic plus Committed Development (excluding Century Park)

AM PM Site


06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00


1.49 1.63 1.35


1.15 1.29 1.32


1.59 1.67 1.27


1.28 1.51




127

Figure 27: Junctions 9 to 12 – SCENARIO D - 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues

14.5.2 The cumulative impact of forecast background traffic by 2028, the addition of Committed Development traffic (excluding Century Park) and proposed Airport growth combine to impact on a number of approach links serving the junctions under test. All junctions are predicted to experience significant stress with extensive queues and delays on most approach links during both the AM and PM peak hours.

14.6 SCENARIO E – Background + Airport Growth + Com. Dev. + Cent. Park (2028)

14.6.1 The final Scenario also forecasts over capacity issues at all four of the junctions tested. The critical links involved at each were:




• Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Road - Eaton Green Road Eastern Approach (AM).




128

Table 79: SCENARIO E - Airport and Non-Airport (2028) + Com. Dev. + Century Park

AM PM Site


06:00-07:00 07:00-08:00 08:00-09:00 17:00-18:00


1.58 1.78 1.63


1.24 1.44 1.51


1.68 1.69 1.31


1.30 1.58

Figure 28: Junctions 9 to 12 – SCENARIO E - 2028 Peak AM and PM ARCADY Queues

14.6.2 The inclusion of Century Park traffic in association with Scenario E simply adds impact to the results forecast under Scenario D conditions. All junctions are predicted to experience further stress with more extensive queues and delays on most approach links during both the AM and PM peak hours.




129

14.7 Off-Site Impacts

14.7.1 Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) and Central Bedfordshire Council (CBC) have requested further detail on the impacts of the proposed development in terms of their respective road networks.

14.7.2 To help inform this exercise URS has extracted the 2028 forecast flows related to the to DOZ, Short Term, Mid Term and Long Term parking areas to establish the predicted number of passengers travelling by private vehicle to the Airport for the AM and PM peak hours used in the URS VISSIM modelling exercise. The distribution provided previously in Table 45 has then been applied for each hour to determine the magnitude of potential road trips by route for passengers travelling by private means (vehicle) for inbound and outbound trips. The results are provided in Table 80.

Table 80: 2028 Forecast Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours

AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours INBOUND ROUTE

% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

M1 (North) Northampton 23.40% 5,301 376 551 238 75 107 314 214 214

M1 (South) London 48.60% 11,009 780 1,145 494 155 222 653 444 444

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 816 58 85 37 11 16 48 33 33

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 2,832 201 294 127 40 57 168 114 114

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 702 50 73 32 10 14 42 28 28

A1081 London Rd (South) Harpenden 4.10% 929 66 97 42 13 19 55 37 37

B653 Lower Harpenden Rd Harpenden 2.00% 453 32 47 20 6 9 27 18 18

Eaton Green Road Tea Green 2.70% 612 43 64 27 9 12 36 25 25

TOTAL 100.0% 22,653 1,605 2,356 1,017 319 457 1,343 914 913

AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours OUTBOUND ROUTE

% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00


M1 (South) London 48.60% 11,003 612 904 395 144 225 643 483 585

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 815 45 67 29 11 17 48 36 43

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 2,830 158 233 102 37 58 165 124 151

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 702 39 58 25 9 14 41 31 37




TOTAL 100.0% 22,641 1,260 1,861 813 297 462 1,324 994 1,204

14.7.3 The tables above show the forecast in terms of total passengers travelling by private means. The actual magnitude of additional traffic impact has been determined by extracting parallel values for LLAOL forecast for the busy August 2012 day, which is shown in Table 81. The final part of the process involved subtracting the 2012 values from those for 2028 to determine the relative additional trips. The result of the final part of the process is shown in Table 82 below.




130

Table 81: 2012 August Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours


% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00


M1 (South) London 48.60% 6,638 552 708 368 218 201 311 198 282

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 492 41 52 27 16 15 23 15 21

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 1,707 142 182 95 56 52 80 51 73

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 423 35 45 23 14 13 20 13 18




TOTAL 100.0% 13,658 1,135 1,457 758 450 413 639 408 581


% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00


M1 (South) London 48.60% 6,637 442 555 292 214 242 196 353 328

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 492 33 41 22 16 18 15 26 24

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 1,707 114 143 75 55 62 50 91 84

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 423 28 35 19 14 15 13 23 21




TOTAL 100.0% 13,657 910 1,143 601 439 498 403 726 674

Table 82: Difference 2028 - 2012 Passenger Vehicles (Travelling by Private Means) - Peak Hours


% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

M1 (North) Northampton 23.40% 2,105 110 210 61 -31 10 165 118 78

M1 (South) London 48.60% 4,372 229 437 126 -64 22 342 246 161

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 324 17 32 9 -5 2 25 18 12

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 1,124 59 112 32 -16 6 88 63 41

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 279 15 28 8 -4 1 22 16 10

A1081 London Rd (South) Harpenden 4.10% 369 19 37 11 -5 2 29 21 14

B653 Lower Harpenden Rd Harpenden 2.00% 180 9 18 5 -3 1 14 10 7

Eaton Green Road Tea Green 2.70% 243 13 24 7 -4 1 19 14 9

TOTAL 100.0% 8,995 470 899 259 -131 44 704 506 332




131


% TRIPS

24hr Total 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

M1 (North) Northampton 23.40% 2,102 82 168 50 -33 -8 215 63 124

M1 (South) London 48.60% 4,366 170 349 103 -69 -18 447 130 257

A6 (North) Bedford 3.60% 323 13 26 8 -5 -1 33 10 19

A505 (East) Hitchin 12.50% 1,123 44 90 27 -18 -5 115 33 66

A505 (West) Dunstable 3.10% 278 11 22 7 -4 -1 29 8 16

A1081 London Rd (South) Harpenden 4.10% 368 14 29 9 -6 -1 38 11 22

B653 Lower Harpenden Rd Harpenden 2.00% 180 7 14 4 -3 -1 18 5 11

Eaton Green Road Tea Green 2.70% 243 9 19 6 -4 -1 25 7 14

TOTAL 100.0% 8,983 350 718 213 -142 -36 920 267 530

14.7.4 The relative decreases shown in the Difference Table for certain hours responds to the forecast change in flight and passenger profiles by 2028, with the very early morning flights likely to prove commercially very popular. In relative terms the early morning demand is significant as it is would fall outside the acknowledged network peak hour; a feature that can also be recognised at the Airport today for similar reasons.

14.7.5 In terms of the influence of vehicles travelling through Hertfordshire the output of this assessment indicates that there would be minimal impact on the route via Eaton Green Road in both the AM and PM situation. The same is considered true for the B653 Lower Harpenden Road; in both cases the demand for both inbound and outbound trips are less than one vehicle per minute. The A1081 London Road (South) serving Harpenden is likely to attract additional passenger traffic, although again this is not predicted to be significant, especially when mixed with general traffic in the area.

14.7.6 The main impact is forecast to occur on the A505 (East) towards Hitchin shown in Table 83.

Table 83: Forecast Impact A505 West of Hitchin

AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours A505 (East) Hitchin

04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

Inbound to Airport 59 112 32 -16 6 88 63 41

Outbound from Airport 44 90 27 -18 -5 115 33 66

TOTAL 103 202 59 -34 1 203 96 107

14.7.7 As noted above in all cases the main impact is predicted during the very early morning period outside the network peak hours, when capacity on the network is higher. The AM 07:00-09:00hrs period covering the morning AM peak indicates that the impact of additional Airport traffic would be negligible and broadly remain at existing levels.

14.7.8 Forecasts for the PM peak show an increase, although at most (16:00-17:00hrs) the values indicate the addition is less than two vehicles per minute heading both towards and away from the Airport using the A505 within Hertfordshire. The values during the normal PM peak of 17:00-18:00hrs are less at around one per minute travelling to the Airport and below one travelling away.




132

14.7.9 To quantify the impact for the LLAL 18mppa masterplan Arup obtained current automatic count data from HCC for the A505 Offley Road in Hitchin. The figures confirmed 884 vehicles heading into Hitchin in the AM peak with 1,170 leaving; a two-way total of 2,054. The corresponding PM values were 854 and 1,025; a two-way PM peak hour total of 1,879. It is considered that the addition of even the worst case PM totals to these figures will have only a very limited impact; with future growth in background traffic the relative impact would be even smaller in 2028. The contact with additional passenger traffic could be further diluted given that once beyond the Luton Boundary other routes are available away from the strategic road network that some drivers may choose for their journey.

14.7.10 St Albans, Watford District and Dacorum have also been identified within Hertfordshire as the main contributors in terms of journeys to and from the Airport. To determine the potential scale of these local journeys the proportion of trips by private mode associated with these authorities was extracted from Section 9.5 above as a proportion of All vehicles. The results are provided in Table 84.

Table 84: Airport Travel Contribution by Main Hertfordshire Districts

District % Hertfordshire

Contribution % All Vehicles

Dacorum District 14.70% 2.62%

St Albans District 25.42% 4.52%

Watford District 13.32% 2.37%

TOTAL 57.55% 10.24%

14.7.11 The percentage contribution in terms of all traffic has been applied to the forecast Airport Growth traffic in Table 82 to provide insight on the likely scale of additional vehicles with origins and destinations associated with District. The results of this exercise are shown in Table 85.

Table 85: Forecast Additional Airport Traffic Impact Main Hertfordshire Districts

AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours DISTRICT AUTHORITY

04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

DACORUM



TOTAL 21 43 13 -7 0 42 20 23

St ALBANS



TOTAL 37 73 22 -12 0 74 35 39

WATFORD



TOTAL 19 38 11 -6 0 39 18 21




133

14.7.12 For journeys associated with neighbouring St Albans, Watford District and Dacorum the predicted additional journeys associated with each District are minimal. It is reasonable to assume that the majority would use the M1 Motorway as the most suitable route, especially in the early hours, and as a consequence would join with other Airport traffic attracted to the southern section of the M1 as identified in Table 82; for ease of reference an extract from this table is included as Table 86.

Table 86: Forecast Additional Airport Traffic Impact M1 South

AM Peak Hours PM Peak Hours A505 (East) Hitchin

04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 16:00 17:00 18:00



TOTAL 399 786 229 -133 4 789 376 418

14.7.13 These more local journeys would form part of the overall demand identified for the M1 Motorway, although the overall contribution to this strategic traffic would be small. It is acknowledged that some drivers may use a variety of more local routes in preference to the Motorway, although this would depend on the specific start/ end location and would ultimately dilute the specific network impacts further. The Motorway has been identified as the main conduit for Airport related traffic and the assessment indicates that the main influence in this respect will relate to more strategic traffic attracted to the M1 from the M25, London and the South East region.

14.7.14 In terms of journeys using the road network through Central Bedfordshire and Bedford Borough the impacts are likely to focus on the M1 and A6 from the north and the A5 and A505 through Luton and Dunstable from the West. The magnitude of these predicted journeys can be noted by reference to Table 82 and is again considered to be low. In common with travel to and from Hertfordshire it is considered reasonable to expect that most local drivers will choose a variety of routes that depend on their location relative to the Airport and individual knowledge of road conditions and preferences. It is acknowledged that congestion at M1 J10a could deter some drivers from using the M1 during peak hours at present however, it is anticipated that the proposed improvements scheduled for this junction will alleviate this issue.

14.7.15 The figures above concentrate on the impact associated with passengers travelling by private vehicle. It is acknowledged that there would also be some additional activity associated with staff, buses and coaches, taxis and to a much lesser degree service vehicles associated with the Airport. The additional demand through proposed Airport growth in each case is not considered to be significant, given that many staff, servicing and taxi drivers use local knowledge to travel a variety of routes to satisfy their journey in common with current behaviours.




134

15 SUMMARY OF HIGHWAY NETWORK IMPACTS

15.1.1 A summary of junction throughput flows from Scenario D, which includes background and committed development except Century Park and forecast Airport traffic by 2028 is provided in Table 87 as a guide to the predicted Airport traffic impact. The table also identifies the forecast additional Airport traffic associated with 18mppa in a separate column for comparison.

Table 87: Scenario D Junction Throughput and Airport Contribution 18mppa 2028

Time Period

JUNCTION From To

All

Traffic

Airport

Growth

(Vehs)

Airport

%

05:00 06:00 4,222 +2,433 58%

08:00 09:00 1,284 -39 -3% 3 Mid Term Car Park Access

17:00 18:00 2,177 +1,174 54%

05:00 06:00 4,587 +2,627 57%

08:00 09:00 2,953 +593 20% 4 A1081 ELC/ Airport Way/ Percival Way – (Holiday Inn Junction)

17:00 18:00 3,692 +1,609 44%

05:00 06:00 1,867 +653 35%

08:00 09:00 3,937 +129 3% 5 A505 / Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Rd/ Airport Way Roundabout

17:00 18:00 4,688 +428 9%

05:00 06:00 1,839 +582 32%

08:00 09:00 3,500 +140 4% 6 Percival Way/ Frank Lester Way Roundabout

17:00 18:00 3,961 +265 7%

05:00 06:00 1,111 +507 46%

08:00 09:00 2,804 +445 16% 7 Eaton Green Road/ Frank Lester Way Roundabout

17:00 18:00 3,066 +606 20%

05:00 06:00 1,118 +614 55%

08:00 09:00 2,422 +762 31% 8 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Eaton Green Road/ Harrowden Road Roundabout

17:00 18:00 2,288 +797 35%

05:00 06:00 1,647 +582 35%

08:00 09:00 4,085 +140 3% 9 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Crawley Green Road Roundabout

17:00 18:00 4,486 +265 6%

05:00 06:00 1,624 +582 36%

08:00 09:00 4,797 +140 3% 10 A505 Vauxhall Way/ Stopsley Way/ A5228 Hitchin Road Roundabout

17:00 18:00 4,857 +265 5%

05:00 06:00 1,043 +295 28%

08:00 09:00 4,823 +98 2% 11 A505 Stopsley Way/ A505 Hitchin Rd/ Ashcroft Way – Stopsley Green Roundbaout

17:00 18:00 4,812 +177 4%

05:00 06:00 578 +173 30%

08:00 09:00 2,348 +300 13% 12 Eaton Green Rd/ Wigmore Lane/ Wigmore Place Roundbaout

17:00 18:00 2,883 +442 15%




135

15.1.2 In term of the highway peak hours and influence on highway junctions the relative contribution to junction throughout made by the forecast additional Airport traffic is below 10%. There are exceptions, which include the junctions at the Holiday Inn (4), Eaton Green Road/ Frank Lester Way (7), A505 Vauxhall Way/ Eaton Green Road/ Harrowden Road (8) and to a lesser degree A505 Stopsley Way/ Hitchin Road/ Ashcroft Way (12).

15.1.3 At the time of busiest forecast Airport demand (05:00-06:00 hrs) the Airport contribution across all junctions is relatively higher, although with the notable exception of the Holiday Inn junction and at the MTCP junction close to the Airport, the total junction throughput is significantly lower than highway peak hours; as a consequence the Airport contribution during this very early morning period is relatively much higher.

15.1.4 Data from the LBC VISSIM model provides the basis for potential impact on M1 J10a. A summary to follow the same format as is provided in Table 88 as a guide to the predicted Airport traffic impact. The table also identifies the forecast additional Airport traffic associated with 18mppa in a separate column for comparison.

Table 88: Scenario D - M1 J10A Throughput and Airport Contribution 18mppa 2028

Time Period

JUNCTION From To

All

Traffic

Airport

Growth

(Vehs)

Airport

%

05:00 06:00 3,451 +1,683 49%

08:00 09:00 8,983 +367 4% M1 Junction 10A

17:00 18:00 10,712 +894 8%

15.1.5 While the very early morning additional Airport demand accounts for 49% of the total junction throughput the impact is much less when the highway peak hours of 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs are compared when the Airport accounts for only 4% and 8% respectively. Importantly the total vehicle throughput predicted at the junction in each of these peak Highway hours is at least 260% greater than during the 05:00-06:00hrs period to provide confidence that the revised J10a design should be more than capable of accommodating future Airport traffic in an 18mppa scenario.

15.1.6 In terms of the URS VISSIM model output Scenario DM discussed in 13.7 above, suggests that with background growth only to 2028, Junction 6 (A505/ Eaton Green Road) could develop queues in the morning peak with increased queues on Airport Way at Junction 5 in the evening peak. The A505 is also forecast to become very busy southbound in the morning peak and northbound in the evening peak, which starts to impede the egress of traffic from these side roads.

15.1.7 When the committed development is added onto this layer of future year background traffic the impact is predominately an increase in flows along the A505, which simply adds traffic to the queues mentioned above, as shown by the Scenario B results. Irrespective of additional Airport traffic the evidence suggests that some road widening will be required on the A505 both north and south of Kimpton Road to add extra lanes that would cater for AM and PM peak hour conditions; with at least two lanes in each direction the most likely requirement.

15.1.8 Under the same scenario, capacity improvements are also forecast to be necessary for the A505 north of Crawley Green Road and also for Eaton Green Road as both have predicted future year flows that suggest the need for widening to maintain link effectiveness. The A505/ Kimpton Road junction in particular has been shown to benefit from the addition of traffic signals to cater for committed development traffic and the forecast increase in background traffic, although for the scheme to be effective additional lane capacity on the A505 approaches to the junction would be necessary, although the overbridge further south does present a physical restriction.




136

15.1.9 Irrespective of further Airport expansion the forecast flows suggest that by 2028 the influence of background plus committed development traffic would justify the need for additional network capacity along key links simply to cater for future growth.

15.1.10 With forecast Airport traffic added to the committed and background traffic by 2028, the most noticeable difference involves the very early morning operation of the Holiday Inn roundabout and a replacement junction strategy with traffic signals will address this to a very large degree. Some transient inbound queues are predicted to occur based on the busy hour forecast flows at around 06:00hrs that is anticipated to last for some 30minutes that could result in an average queue of some 50 vehicles on ELC with the traffic signals in place. This is not expected to be a regular event however and only occur at high peak Airport situations on very busy days.

15.1.11 For the remaining hours in the AM and assuming the A505 improvements there is no significant difference when the Airport traffic is added to the Committed and background traffic situation in respect of reported average queues and delays. This is largely due to the differing route, location and time characteristics associated with Airport set against committed development traffic plus their relative journey patterns associated with the A505 and A1081 ELC. In terms of the PM situation the boundaries are less well defined, but the impact is still small.

15.1.12 Although the proposed Airport expansion will add to the situation predicted for the A1081 and A505, the scale of reasonable improvements required catering for background and committed development traffic alone would absorb the forecast traffic associated with the predicted additional Airport traffic.

15.1.13 The sensitivity test that includes Century Park shifts the balance in terms of the PM situation despite very little change in the AM. The modelled PM hours indicate that the addition of Century Park traffic impacts on the Holiday Inn traffic signals, which lengthens the average queue on Percival Way. In subsequent hours this has a knock-on effect on the Kimpton Road junction and to a lesser extent the network though the Percival Way employment area.




137

16 PROPOSED NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS BY LLAOL

16.1 Introduction

16.1.1 The proposed scheme has been informed by an appreciation of present conditions and study of network operations and driver/ passenger behaviour. This has been an important part of the process to ensure that current issues that impact on effective and efficient access and movement both to and from the terminal are avoided, when considering an effective arrangement to accommodate proposed future growth.

16.1.2 As part of the development proposals LLAOL is seeking to take forward improvements to the Airport Approach road and surrounding the CTA and these improvements have been assumed in this assessment.

16.1.3 The scheme therefore being promoted by LLAOL to overcome identified capacity and operational issues associated with the existing highway and future access arrangement to the airports’ CTA therefore includes:

• A new PTH adjacent to the terminal, with the current layout of bus stops amended to provide a total of 18 dedicated bus parking bays forming an arc fronting the terminal building. Buses will drive into bays and reverse out with each of the bays provided a raised pavement area for passengers. The area will also include a drive-in/ drive-out linear bay to cater for the articulated Rail-Airport bendy-bus shuttle service. The proposed changes will reduce potential interaction between moving buses and pedestrians and the curved nature of the reconfigured concourse in front of the terminal will provide an improved pedestrian environment. Connection will be provided between the pedestrian concourse in front of the terminal and the STCP via a new bridge structure with triple lifts.

• Improvement of Airport Way to provide a dual 2-lane 7.3 m wide carriageway from the Holiday Inn Roundabout up to the CTA. The proposed speed limit along this route will be 30 mph. The inbound carriageway will follow the alignment of the existing Airport Way and the new outbound carriageway will be constructed adjacent to the existing road on the southern side.

• The new outbound carriageway will pass under airport taxiway Alpha through the southern portal of the existing bridge structure. No alterations to the existing structure are required to accommodate the new carriageway.

• A new all movements traffic signal controlled junction on Airport Way to provide access to the MTCP. This new junction will be at the same location as the existing MTCP access junction and will include pedestrian facilities to provide the benefit of a controlled crossing across the proposed dual carriageway.

• Revisions to the Holiday Inn roundabout to provide a traffic signal controlled junction linked with the proposed Mid Term traffic signal junction to coordinate traffic movements.

• Dedicated access to the CTA for authorised buses, taxis and authorised personnel provided by a filter lane that diverges from the inbound Airport Way carriageway to access the PTH, the Taxi Rank and Airport offices, with a new facility to the west of the terminal that will handle delivery and service vehicles to avoid the need to retain the existing route to the undercroft.

• All other public traffic will continue along the new Airport Way towards the improved DOZ and terminal public car parking area.

• A marked exclusive lay-by facility for buses/ coaches for authorised vehicles provided by the Off-site Car Park Operators (OCPOs) on the inbound route to the DOZ. This will provide OCPO customers with a convenient terminus in relatively close proximity to the Terminal. Smaller OCPO vehicles will be catered for nearby through provision of designated bays that will be allocated within the DOZ facility. Positive Wayfinding signing




138

will advertise and direct OCPO customers along a convenient walking route that will link these facilities with the Terminal; avoiding any need for them to cross moving traffic. .

• A new traffic signal controlled junction will be provided at the junction of the improved Airport Way with the revised circulatory carriageway/ exit from the PTH to manage access/ egress efficiently.

• All vehicles will be directed to the improved DOZ and STCP via a two lane carriageway primarily running around the perimeter of the surface car park. The route will form a loop road that eventually provides the exit route for both these facilities before returning drivers to Airport Way at the junction with the PTH.

• Access into the DOZ will be from the north eastern side of the area currently occupied by the STCP with access monitored by ANPR cameras. Access to the STCP will be from the south of the perimeter road, with vehicles controlled by automated ticket barriers.

• All vehicles will exit the STCP via a controlled barrier system on the outbound loop road and then Airport Way. The exit barriers for DOZ traffic will also be located in close proximity to provide a coordinated exit plaza arrangement.

• A corridor though the area has been safeguarded to accommodate an onward route to link with Century Park in the event that this is required.

16.1.4 A series of plans to confirm the details of the proposed road improvements are included in APPENDIX K.

16.2 Engineering Design

16.2.1 The predicted airport traffic associated with 18mppa equates to some 3,722 vehicles attracted to the CTA in a busy AM peak hour of 05:00 - 06:00hrs (1,935 inbound and 1,787 outbound). Between the Holiday Inn roundabout and the MTCP access the equivalent figures are 2,204 inbound and 1,929 outbound; an overall two-way flow of 4,133.

16.2.2 Guidance from the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges24

points towards two Urban All Purpose (UAP) road types described in TA79/99.

UAP1 High standard single/ dual carriageway road carrying predominantly through traffic with limited access.

40-60mph for dual & generally 40 mph for single

UAP2 Good standard single/ dual carriageway road with frontage access and more than two side road per km

Generally 40mph

UAP3 Variable standard road carrying mixed traffic with frontage access, side roads, bus stops and at grade pedestrian crossings

30-40mph

UAP4 Busy high street carrying predominantly local traffic with frontage activity including loading and unloading.

30mph

16.2.3 In terms of link capacities for the circumstances both UAP2 and UAP3 are worthy candidates; however junction capacities and the need to channel vehicles along certain routes for traffic management purposes are considered to be the main determining factor when deploying a long term operationally effective layout.

16.2.4 For design purposes TA79/99 suggests maximum one-way hourly traffic flows shown in Table 89. The existing 7.3m single carriageway value is highlighted, plus the values of the UAP2 and 3 road types.

24

Volume 5 Section 1 Part 3 TA79/99 Amendment No1. Tables 2 (see Appendix Table G2) and 4 ; and

Volume 6 Section 2 Part 1 TD22/06 Figures 2/3 and 2/5, and Table 3/1a (see Appendix Table G3).




139

Table 89: Capacities of Urban Roads from TA79/99

16.2.5 The forecast flows for the link between Percival Way and the MTCP suggest that a single 7.3m carriageway would be over capacity and road widening is necessary. Given the relatively short distance between the two junctions there will be a relatively high proportion of vehicles weaving and stopping, leading to decreased capacities.

16.2.6 Traffic signals are proposed to manage demand at the MTCP, with widening to accommodate turning traffic lanes on the airport approach road at the junction. As a consequence there is a reasonable case to consider the introduction of a dual carriageway link between the two junctions to accommodate traffic manoeuvres associated with both junctions given the relatively short distance between them.

16.2.7 Beyond the MTCP access the predicted flows for 18mppa also suggest that the existing 7.3m carriageway link between the car park and the CTA will be above the theoretical capacity for a UAP2 and UAP3 single carriageway link and as a consequence it is proposed that the dual carriageway would continue into the CTA.

16.3 Airport Access Roads

16.3.1 It is acknowledged that if retained in its present form the early morning Airport demand would cause the Holiday Inn roundabout to exceed its operational capacity. This has been demonstrated in the VISSIM testing presented earlier in this report. Preliminary examinations suggested that there is limited scope to increase the size of the existing roundabout as the site is constrained by topography, the existing geometry of approach roads and land-use/ ownership issues. Replacement of the roundabout by Traffic signals was therefore considered as the most suitable remedy.

16.3.2 There remains some uncertainty over the final access arrangements to serve Century Park, which adds a level of complexity that leaves formal resolution of the final junction form open to some degree at this time. While Century Park benefits from outline consent, access is yet to be formally approved. URS understands that the option most favoured by LBC involves a direct route between the Holiday Inn roundabout that passes through the CTA and beyond to service the Century Park site further east.




140

16.3.3 Given that the final arrangements for Century Park remain unclear at this time the specific impact and form of eventual improvement required demands more detailed appraisal and negotiation with the various parties involved to agree a viable strategy upon which to base and confirm the scale and timing of any future improvements required.

16.3.4 With the potential for a route passing through the CTA to access Century Park URS has however tested a signal option for the Holiday Inn junction as an integral part of this Assessment. The first iteration relied on a layout design provided and tested in LinSIG by Arup for LLAL, which examined a future traffic signal improvement for the junction. This was introduced into the URS VISSIM model to test the effectiveness of the design in a wider network context, using updated LLAOL forecast flows at 18mppa for 2028.

16.3.5 URS has made some modifications to the Arup design in response to the VISSIM assessment and the revised layout is included for reference in Appendix K as URS Drawing No 46378017/I/BO/203 and 204.

16.3.6 With the exception of a relatively short period in the very early morning during the busy August Airport peak the assessment has demonstrated that proposed traffic signal layout will cater for predicted demand. For more usual conditions and across the rest of the day the proposed traffic signals provide adequate capacity to cater for forecast Airport traffic, with sufficient reserve to accommodate Century Park traffic in the event that that a route through the CTA for this development is finalised.

16.3.7 It is acknowledged that there could be a requirement for S106 or S278 funding related to the Airport development for other local improvements. The Applicant therefore expects to enter into detailed discussion and negotiation on such matters based on reasonable, relevant and proportionate contributions towards suitable enhancements.

16.4 Road Safety Audit

16.4.1 A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit was carried out on the proposed improvements to the CTA, Airport Way and the Holiday Inn roundabout in November 2012. The extent of the Audit included the proposed dual two-lane carriageway from its junction with the Holiday Inn Roundabout, the revisions to the roundabout itself to provide traffic signals and the proposed alterations surrounding the CTA.

16.4.2 The Audit raised 14 Problems:

1. Lack of a bus stop lay-by opposite the Holiday Inn that may result in pedestrians having to walk to airport;

2. Exit barriers for DOZ, Short term and Short Term Over-flow car park very close together requiring seven rows of vehicles to merge into two lanes. This could result in side-swipe collisions should drivers not act in a reasonable manner and give-way in turn.

3. Alignment of lanes through traffic signal junction could result in side swipe incidents on the southbound approach to the Holiday Inn traffic signals.

4. At the exit to the proposed bus coach area the gap in the central reservation could be used by vehicles to carry out U-turn resulting in collisions with other vehicles.

5. Restricted forward visibility at exit from STCP due to position of elevated walkway construction.

6. Layout of stagger within the central island at the entry to the MTCP is not as preferred, resulting in pedestrians walking with their back to approaching traffic.

7. Potential for collision with passengers from the Taxi rank as they move to and from this area as there is no marked position at which to cross to and from the Airport Terminal.

8. Lack of Pedestrian facility across entrance/ exit to ‘Goods-In’ area.




141

9. Footway/ Cycleway facility travelling westwards for the MTCP leading people to join ELC with no alternative.

10. Narrow footway at entry/ exit to DOZ car park that could result in pedestrian walking tin the carriageway resulting in collisions with vehicles.

11. Lack of pedestrian crossing facility within Percival Way traffic signalised junction that could result in collisions between pedestrians and vehicles.

12. Lack of weaving length between Holiday Inn traffic signals and the proposed signalised access into the MTCP access, which may result in side-swipe collisions.

13. Lack of KEEP CLEAR markings at Park & Ride bus exit from MTCP that may result in collisions should the bus be waiting to pass through the traffic signals.

14. Lack of destination road marking to assist drivers to ensure they enter the correct lane at the proposed Holiday Inn traffic signals.

16.4.3 The Designer25

has accepted Problem 1 and confirmed that an ‘On-carriageway’ bus stop located to the east of the MTCP signal controlled junction will be incorporated into the design in conjunction with the incorporation of a controlled pedestrian facility within the Holiday Inn signal controlled junction on the approach to Percival Way.

16.4.4 Problem 3 is also accepted and the scheme layout has been amended to provide a better alignment for Lanes 2 and 3 from Percival way through to the junction of ELC. In response to Problem 4 the Audit recommendation for incorporating a Traffic Regulation Order banning U-turns on the inbound carriageway at the CTA traffic signal junction has been accepted for inclusion at detailed design. The Designer has also accepted the recommendations associated with Problem 7 and 8 with the layout amended to provide zebra crossings aligned with most direct desire lines.

16.4.5 Problem 9 is also accepted and the scheme layout has been amended to follow the Audit recommendations that the combined cycle/ footway on the southern side of Airport Way is deleted to include the proposed controlled crossing at the exit from the MTCP. Problem 10 is also accepted and the scheme layout amended to relocate the crossing point to an area with improved footway width.

16.4.6 The Designer accepts Problem 11 and the scheme has been amended to incorporate a controlled pedestrian facility to follow the Audit recommendation. It is accepted that the detailed design will provide adequate advance warning/ information on possible destinations to aid lane discipline in response to Problem 12 and the installation of KEEP CLEAR road markings and others at suitable locations to address Problem 13 and 14.

16.4.7 The Designer has not accepted Problem 2 based on the results of the VISSIM micro-simulation modelling that shows that the exit barriers are likely to provide adequate gaps in the traffic to enable vehicles to merge in an acceptable manner. Problem 5 is also not accepted on the basis that the design for the exit road assumes that the route to the traffic signals is still within the car park environment where the adopted design speed is 30kph (18mph); in the circumstances the Stopping Sight Distance requirement for Manual for Streets at 25m (which allows of use by HGVs) is achieved.

16.4.8 The Audit comments for Problem 6 are also not accepted as the Designer considers that it is not practicable to provide the preferred stagger arrangement on the crossing due to the detrimental impact that this would have on the effective operation of the MTCP signal controlled junction.

16.4.9 A copy of the Stage 1 Road Safety Audit Report with the Designer’s Response is included in APPENDIX L.

25

The term ‘Designer’ is used in Road Safety Audits to signify the Design Team responsible for the technical design of the scheme.




142

16.5 Wider Network Improvements

M1 J10A

16.5.1 In respect of Junction 10A, no allowance has been made to identify specific Airport impacts as this was considered and reported by LBC using its VISSIM model, which has informed the potential scale of improvements necessary. It has been announced that funding of this project is moving forward. Once again there is likely to be a requirement for S106 or S278 funding related to the Airport development and the Applicant anticipates detailed discussion and negotiation to allow consideration of a fair and reasonable contribution.

A1081 and A505 Corridors

16.5.2 Setting aside M1 J10a, the wider network testing presented in earlier chapters has identified a number of significant issues associated with the future performance of the surrounding highway network, irrespective of proposed Airport growth. These are predicted to require fairly extensive infrastructure improvements over the coming years to keep pace with both potential background traffic growth and also to enable the schedule of Committed Development proposed for this area of Luton. The situation becomes even more acute when the influence of Century Park traffic is added to the mix.

16.5.3 Faced with the scale of network issues with the potential need for improvement by 2028 even without proposed Airport expansion, it seems unreasonable at this time to try and isolate and identify specific improvements on the wider network proportional to Airport impacts alone. The potential scale of improvement necessary for both the A1081 and the A505 are considered well in excess of what the applicant could be reasonably expected to address or fund on an exclusive basis as they are also dependant of other factors outside the Applicant’s control. One notable example of this relates to the need to consider improvements at the A505 Vauxhall Way/ Kimpton Road junction and its associated A505 approach links, which has been identified for junction and capacity improvements by 2028 to satisfy the demands of committed development and future background traffic growth.

16.5.4 With the exception of the Kimpton Road junction no allowance has therefore been made to isolate and identify specific highway improvements outside those identified for the immediate Airport Way approach road in hand with the presumption to conclude matters related to Century Park and the need to settle on the scale of suitable potential revisions at the Holiday Inn roundabout.

16.5.5 A proposal for traffic signals to replace the existing roundabout at the Holiday Inn has been assessed for inclusion within this report to show an appropriate improvement to cater for proposed Airport growth. It is however acknowledged that this could require more detailed scrutiny and agreement once the Century Park access route strategy is finally settled, as this could influence traffic distribution at the junction.

16.5.6 In common with comments related to likely contributions above, the Applicant accepts that this is a matter that will be the subject of further dialogue and negotiation with the authorities at a suitable time in the planning process.




143

17 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

17.1 Airport Demand for Travel

17.1.1 London-Luton Airport Operations Limited (LLAOL) has plans for development which would facilitate an increase from its current 2012 capacity of 10.5 million passengers per annum to 18 million between now and 2028. The Airport is an important asset for the local and regional economy and future expansion is considered vital to the local economy and its competiveness. LLAOL is currently half-way through a thirty-year contract with London-Luton Airport Limited (LLAL), which runs to 2031. Over the course of the contract to date LLAOL has seen the Airport grow in terms of passenger numbers and has invested significantly to improve the Airport facilities. This is consistent with Luton Borough Council’s aim to support Luton’s growth as an international gateway in the context of both the growth of London-Luton Airport and ease of access to the new Channel Tunnel Rail Link terminus at St Pancras.

17.1.2 LLAOL’s proposals for the next phase of Luton Airport’s life will address current constraints and provide significant benefits to passengers and Airport businesses and provide for the anticipated development of the Airport for the next 15-20 years.

17.1.3 The proposals have been designed to be as efficient and effective as practicable and to use existing infrastructure to the fullest extent commensurate with this. The main components are:

• A new PTH adjacent to the terminal, with the current layout of bus stops amended to provide a total of 18 dedicated bus parking bays forming an arc fronting the terminal building. Buses will drive into bays and reverse out with each of the bays provided a raised pavement area for passengers. The area will also include a drive-in/ drive-out linear bay to cater for the articulated Rail-Airport bendy-bus shuttle service. The proposed changes will reduce potential interaction between moving buses and pedestrians and the curved nature of the reconfigured concourse in front of the terminal will provide an improved pedestrian environment. Connection will be provided between the pedestrian concourse in front of the terminal and the STCP via a new bridge structure with triple lifts.

• Improvement of Airport Way to provide a dual 2-lane 7.3 m wide carriageway from the Holiday Inn Roundabout up to the CTA. The proposed speed limit along this route will be 30 mph. The inbound carriageway will follow the alignment of the existing Airport Way and the new outbound carriageway will be constructed adjacent to the existing road on the southern side.

• The new outbound carriageway will pass under airport taxiway Alpha through the southern portal of the existing bridge structure. No alterations to the existing structure are required to accommodate the new carriageway.

• A new all movements traffic signal controlled junction on Airport Way to provide access to the MTCP. This new junction will be at the same location as the existing MTCP access junction and will include pedestrian facilities to provide the benefit of a controlled crossing across the proposed dual carriageway.

• Revisions to the Holiday Inn roundabout to provide a traffic signal controlled junction linked with the proposed Mid Term traffic signal junction to coordinate traffic movements.

• Dedicated access to the CTA for authorised buses, taxis and authorised personnel provided by a filter lane that diverges from the inbound Airport Way carriageway to access the PTH, the Taxi Rank and Airport offices, with a new facility to the west of the terminal that will handle delivery and service vehicles to avoid the need to retain the existing route to the undercroft.

• All other public traffic will continue along the new Airport Way towards the improved DOZ and terminal public car parking area.




144

• A marked exclusive lay-by facility for buses/ coaches for authorised vehicles provided by the Off-site Car Park Operators (OCPOs) on the inbound route to the DOZ. This will provide OCPO customers with a convenient terminus in relatively close proximity to the Terminal. Smaller OCPO vehicles will be catered for nearby through provision of designated bays that will be allocated within the DOZ facility. Positive Wayfinding signing will advertise and direct OCPO customers along a convenient walking route that will link these facilities with the Terminal; avoiding any need for them to cross moving traffic. .

• A new traffic signal controlled junction will be provided at the junction of the improved Airport Way with the revised circulatory carriageway/ exit from the PTH to manage access/ egress efficiently.

• All vehicles will be directed to the improved DOZ and STCP via a two lane carriageway primarily running around the perimeter of the surface car park. The route will form a loop road that eventually provides the exit route for both these facilities before returning drivers to Airport Way at the junction with the PTH.

• Access into the DOZ will be from the north eastern side of the area currently occupied by the STCP with access monitored by ANPR cameras. Access to the STCP will be from the south of the perimeter road, with vehicles controlled by automated ticket barriers.

• All vehicles will exit the STCP via a controlled barrier system on the outbound loop road and then Airport Way. The exit barriers for DOZ traffic will also be located in close proximity to provide a coordinated exit plaza arrangement.

• A corridor though the area has been safeguarded to accommodate an onward route to link with Century Park in the event that this is required.

17.1.4 In traffic and transportation terms, the proposed new built development is not envisaged to directly result in significant changes to the general pattern of travel both to and from the Airport, although the number of travelling passengers will inevitably increase. The development proposals will however serve to increase the passenger throughput of the Airport from a level of some 9.5mppa during 2011 to a projected throughput of 18mppa.

17.1.5 The purpose of the road improvement works is to improve access, legibility and safety and to reduce congestion on the road network around the Airport both now and for the future. Construction of the A1081 East Luton Corridor (ELC) has made substantial improvements to the access into the Airport, smoothing traffic flows from the M1 Motorway and providing an excellent ‘Gateway’ to the town and Airport. Difficulties at some junctions around the Airport have been recognised, in particular at the Holiday Inn roundabout. At times this can present the first major bottleneck for some people travelling along the dualled part of the ELC into the Airport.

17.1.6 From time to time the current road layout impedes access, as the existing Airport approach road is only a single carriageway with finite capacity that serves a terminal and supporting facilities housed in effectively a cul-de-sac. Recent revisions to the access arrangements at the CTA have demonstrated the benefit of reducing conflict and confusion for those unfamiliar with the circumstances.

17.1.7 The works LLAOL is proposing aim to do even more by smoothing flows around the CTA to address existing congestion, which can still result in tailbacks occasionally that interfere with the Holiday Inn Roundabout and the approach roads to it. The proposals will provide benefit for the travelling public today, while helping to satisfy proposals for future growth.

17.1.8 A key component of the proposal is the revised Public Transport Hub that will deliver passengers travelling by public bus or coach services directly to the terminal door, with an arrangement that removes passenger conflict with vehicular traffic. The position and layout of the revised layout demonstrates LLAOL’s firm commitment to encourage as many passengers as practicable to enjoy the benefits of travelling to and from the Airport by these sustainable modes.




145

17.2 Sustainable Future

17.2.1 To limit congestion on the nearby road network and to reduce the environmental impact of travel both to and from the Airport, LLAOL will continue to actively encourage crew, employees and passengers to use public transport and where practicable other sustainable modes to access the Airport. Where this is not practicable then car sharing with colleagues is promoted. In future local employees and some passengers will also be able to ride the Luton-Dunstable busway thereby adding further choice and convenience to their travel arrangements.

17.2.2 Although many passengers will continue to prefer to travel by private transport, the Airport will carry on with its successful work to date to reduce this number by promoting a number of initiatives such as pricing mechanisms for pick-up charging and promotion of public transport services. This will be aided by scheduled plans by others offering extra capacity on the rail network, supplemented by the expected rise in bus and coach capacity and services as operators grasp the commercial opportunities presented by more Airport related customers.

17.2.3 A number of specific actions have been set in LLA’s current Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS) 2012-2017, with the objective to improve performance; this will continue to be monitored and reviewed against targets on an annual basis through the London-Luton Airport Transport Forum. A commitment to sustainable staff travel is integral to the ASAS, with further emphasis and focus to be added through specific targets, mechanisms and monitoring set out in an Employee Travel Plan that accompanies this TA.

17.2.4 Rail travel is an important component of many passenger journeys and the proposed Airport Growth will encourage more people to use the train. The proposals for additional trains and emerging infrastructure improvements associated with the Thameslink Line is expected to provide adequate capacity to cater for those passengers attracted to the service for journeys involving London and beyond. It is however acknowledged that the Midland Main Line does is likely to show signs of stress in network peak hours, however Network rail is aware that beyond 2019, additional capacity is required to meet the growth projections and have indicated that new rolling stock for use on Long Distance High Speed services, such as that proposed by the Intercity Express Programme, would provide sufficient additional seating to manage growth over the longer term. It is considered that the capacity improvements provided with the Thameslink Line will accommodate much of the Airport growth in terms of rail patronage, although it is acknowledged this will add additional patronage to the Midland Mainline, which will rely on delivery of new trains and the outcome of HS2. The relative proportion of this additional demand during the peak hours is however relatively small when considered across the number of trains provided per hour.

17.2.5 The current level of bus and coach services that supply the Airport offers reserve capacity with the capabilities to cater for additional passenger demand. Even if bus and coach mode share remains at present proportions it is forecast that with the majority of the services would still maintain the ability to cater for predicted demand based on existing frequencies. There are exceptions that involve National Express Services 422 and 737 where the calculated maximum loading is over 100%. It is considered reasonable to expect that National Express would provide additional vehicles to take advantage of the commercial benefits to be gained by serving this extra demand.

17.2.6 Application of the ASAS assumed mode share of 40% of passengers travelling by non-car mode the forecasts indicates that the majority of the services will have the capacity to cater for the predicted demand at 18mppa.

17.3 Car Parking

17.3.1 The requirement at 18mppa for passenger parking is calculated at an overall total of 10,221 spaces - a forecast requirement for an additional 3,502 spaces. The proposal includes for 9,629 spaces. Added to this is the need for an additional 706 new spaces for staff car parking of which 336 can currently be provided at-grade on existing Airport land at various locations.




146

17.3.2 Taking account of the ASAS objective for more than 40% of passengers travelling by public transport by 2017 and beyond, the parking space available at the Airport and a number of off-airport parking facilities, there is no need at this time to provide additional parking capacity on site; above that already planned. As the Airport grows however, it is highly important that the correct range of parking options is provided for customers and also for staff. On-going monitoring of use will inform this decision.

17.3.3 The Airport uses a combination of historical data, forward occupancy forecasting, booking volumes and price analysis to actively manage which products and car parks are purchased by its customers. This practice allows the Airport to achieve operational occupancy of over 99%, while ensuring that customers that have not pre-booked can always be accommodated.

17.3.4 It will continue to do this and if further parking capacity is eventually needed on site in the future, for example by the provision of additional decked or multi-storey parking, this will be provided in a timely manner and a further planning application(s) will be made at the appropriate time.

17.3.5 The applicant is willing to discuss the scope and nature of monitoring and reporting on car park occupancy and the triggers for the provision of additional on-site parking space.

17.4 Airport Access Roads

Existing Situation

• The current network supporting the CTA operates well in response to the recent temporary layout arrangements made to the DOZ and STCP access and egress arrangements.

• Occasional congestion is still experienced at the CTA during peak times although it is currently less frequent than before with less impact on the Holiday Inn roundabout. This has enabled a more reliable network that is evidenced by improved journey times and potential changes in driver journey patterns.

• The route to the LTCP through the Percival Way Employment area is also reasonably untroubled – there are some minor queues at junctions of Percival Way/ Frank Lester Way/ Presidents Way and Frank Lester Way/ Eaton Green Road during network peak hours but these tend to be fairly short lived and linked with local employment activity at the beginning and end of the working day that creates passing local demand spikes.

• A similar picture is acknowledged for local traffic passing through junction of Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Lane in terms of minimal delay and occasional spikes, with modelling reporting that the junction currently operates within capacity.

Future Conditions

• The proposed upgrade of Airport approach road to dual carriageway and provision of traffic signals at the MTCP has been tested as an integral part of these development proposals and would give suitable capacity to deal with current concerns and forecast future traffic demand attracted by the CTA without issue;

• The commercial flight pattern predicted by 2028 does however prompt significant early traffic demand (05:00 - 06:00hrs) attracted by the first flights of the day. Traffic volumes would be relatively much lower across the rest of the day;

• This early morning rush causes congestion and extensive queues at the Holiday Inn roundabout however the situation would clear before 07:00hrs. No other issues were identified for other modelled periods of the day suggesting that capacity issues at the roundabout would only occur during this very focussed early morning period;




147

17.4.1 Retained in its current form this early AM Airport peak demand forecast by 2028 would cause the Holiday Inn roundabout to exceed its operational capacity. VISSIM testing has shown that this can be mitigated by provision of a revised junction layout controlled by traffic signals, with a design included as an integral part of LLAOL’s proposals. There remains some uncertainty over the final access arrangements to serve Century Park, which adds a level of complexity that may require the final details of the junction to be revisited at a later time depending on resolution of this matter.

17.4.2 Although Century Park benefits from outline consent, access is yet to be formally approved. The most direct route would be between the Holiday Inn roundabout passing through the CTA and beyond. In response to LBC’s commitment to ensure that this site is brought forward to assist with economic development in the town, this application contains (as an appendix to the Planning Supporting Statement) details to demonstrate that this route can be delivered, would work in traffic terms and could be constructed without significant adverse impact on the Airport operations.

17.4.3 However, given that the final arrangements for Century Park are currently not confirmed, the specific impact and form of eventual improvement required demands more detailed thought and negotiation with the various parties involved to agree a viable strategy and to confirm the scale and timing of any future improvements.

17.4.4 In the event that access to Century Park is delivered by a route passing through the CTA then the traffic signal layout to replace the Holiday Inn roundabout with Century Park would address the 2028 forecast demand for both ventures. Based on busy August forecast flows it is acknowledged that there would be very busy days where some relatively short lived very early morning congestion forecast with future Airport traffic demand could occur; this is however predicted to be for a short period of less than one hour and then attached to extreme peak Airport demand linked with the busiest holiday period for air travel.

17.4.5 It is accepted that there will be a requirement for S106 or S278 funding related to the Airport development for local improvements to the Holiday Inn roundabout with some potential for modifications once the future route to serve Century Park access is agreed.

17.5 M1 Motorway J10A

Existing Situation

• The M1 J10a is already well known as a junction under stress with plans in hand to deliver improvements.

Future Conditions

• LBC’s has prepared and is promoting a scheme for improvement that should address the current capacity failings plus assist with delivery of future development in the corridor.

• The HA’s Active Traffic Management system, once fully operational, will also release link capacity for the M1 Motorway, which will be aided by future proposals for the M1 – A5 link road.

17.5.1 The proposed improvement scheme has been submitted as a National Infrastructure Project; the Examination in Public into the proposals has commenced and is due to finish in May 2013. A decision is due in November 2013. Funding is in place for the scheme and it is supported by the Highways Agency. There is therefore a high level of confidence that this improvement will be delivered.

17.5.2 In terms of the impact of Airport related traffic on this junction and the potential implications if it is not delivered in a timely manner, while the very early morning additional Airport demand accounts for 49% of the total junction throughput the impact is much less when the highway peak hours of 08:00-09:00hrs and 17:00-18:00hrs are compared when the Airport accounts for only 4% and 8% respectively.




148

17.5.3 Taking account of impact of growth, crucially the total vehicle throughput predicted at the junction in each of the peak Highway hours is at least 260% greater than during the earlier 05:00-06:00hrs period; this provides confidence that the revised J10a design will be more than capable of accommodating the forecast future Airport traffic.

17.6 A1081 and A505 Corridor

Existing Situation

• Putting aside current congestion issues surrounding M1 J10A no other issues of note have been identified for the reminder of the A1081 ELC route though to the Airport save occasional busy periods at the Holiday Inn roundabout.

• The A1081/ Gipsy Lane traffic signals currently work relatively well, although congestion on the M1 spur west of Junction 10a is effectively holding flow back from the junction – It is therefore unlikely that the junction will face full demand until improvements to Junction 10A are in place.

• Where the A1081 diverges to join the A505, the approach to Kimpton Road roundabout is showing some signs of stress with large queues recorded in the evening peak. These can extend back towards and sometimes beyond the Airport Way flyover with the risk that over time the queue could extend back onto the dual carriageway, disrupting A1081 eastbound flows and presenting a safety hazard.

• Further along the A505 there are capacity issues at the junction with Crawley Green Road in the AM, while the other junctions tested along this route report some spare capacity. There are however periods when they all operate above desirable operational capacity thresholds. The flow along the A505 north of Kimpton Road also reports possible capacity failings, which could lead to flow breakdown on occasions with increased journey times relative to free flow conditions.

Future Conditions

• At the Gipsy Lane junction, more traffic is delivered to it in the future year with development through a combination of traffic growth and the improvement to Junction 10A, placing greater strain on the junction. In the AM peak, the LBC model predicts significant queues on the northern approach from Gipsy Lane itself, and to a lesser extent on the inbound (westbound) Airport Way approach. Resolution of these issues is likely to be beyond the scope of fine-tuning the signals. The corresponding LBC model PM results are not available to date but the tidality of forecast flows and general increases in traffic would suggest that Gipsy Lane and the outbound Airport Way approaches would be subject to similar issues in the future PM peak.

• VISSIM modelling has shown that the situation at Kimpton Road would deteriorate by 2028 simply through the influence of growth in 2028 Do-Minimum situation (background traffic only); even without any committed development or considerations for future Airport growth. The forecast high volume of A505 traffic passing through the junction causes excessive queues along Eaton Green Road and Kimpton Road. Issues would also be evident further along Eaton Green Road where capacity issues emerge in the PM peak at the Eaton Green Road/ Wigmore Lane junction – notable queues build on the Eaton Green Road (W) approach to roundabout.

• Other junctions under test along the A505 also show signs of extreme stress under Do-Minimum scenario – extensive queues predicted tailing back from Crawley Green Road (E) and Ashcroft Road in the morning network peak and both Hitchin Road and Stopsley Way at their junction with Vauxhall Way in the PM peak.

• Adding Committed Development by 2028 adds further network pressure to the Do-Minimum network junction stress. The A1081/ A505 Kimpton junction reports as over




149

capacity with queues on all arms (AM) with severe queuing on the A1081 approach to A505/ Kimpton Road junction (PM) tailing back and through the Gipsy Lane traffic signals.

• Adding Committed Development leads to significant over capacity issues at all remaining junctions tested along the A505. Testing indicates that even without Century Park, the demand from the level of Committed Development would result in significant capacity failings and delay along the route of the A505. Similar results would be expected when only the Airport traffic is added to the 2028 Do-Minimum case.

• The full Airport and Committed Development 2028 Scenario adds additional stress to an already congested network.

17.6.1 No allowance has been made to identify specific highway improvements outside those proposed for the immediate Airport Way approach road and at the Holiday Inn roundabout. It is however acknowledged that there could be a requirement for S106 or S278 funding related to the Airport development and therefore the applicant expects to enter into detailed discussion and negotiation on such matters based on reasonable, relevant and proportionate contributions towards suitable improvements.

17.6.2 There is however other more substantial network issues that would need to be resolved by 2028, many of which stem from potential growth in background traffic alone and compounded by the schedule of Committed Development. The situation becomes even more acute when Century Park traffic is added to the mix. The potential scale of these improvements involving both the A1081 and the A505 and further afield are considered well in excess of what the applicant could be reasonably expected to address on a selected basis as they are linked with other factors.

17.6.3 It is also recognised that there are a number of local routes available to residents, employees and others that could be used for Airport related travel from the surrounding area and the Airport does what it can to encourage people to use main routes. It is not however practicable for this TA to make an assessment of every route available and it would be the responsibility of the Highway Authority to identify and promote controls if particular issues arise. In this context it acknowledged that there could be a requirement for S106 or S278 funding related to the Airport development and therefore the applicant expects to enter into detailed discussion and negotiation on such matters based on reasonable, relevant and proportionate contributions towards suitable improvements.

17.6.4 The Transport Assessment has been prepared in line with the scope agreed with Luton Borough Council and the Highways Agency. It concludes that development can occur with the highway improvements and public transport measures described.

London Luton London’s Local Airport - Hitchin Forum · 46378017: London-Luton Airport Operations...

Documents

Transcript of London Luton London’s Local Airport - Hitchin Forum · 46378017: London-Luton Airport Operations...