CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS … · Cumulative Assessment of Future...

$: CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS … · Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network Issue No.Final Page 3 Document No. 3380\SICP\01$
S

Transport for Surrey

CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ON THE HIGHWAY

NETWORK

Final Report

Issue No.Final Page 2 Document No. 3380\SICP\01

Project Title: Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network

Document Title: Final Report Client Reference: Date: 06 September 2011 Prepared By: Print Emma Brundle Sign ....... ......................................... Authorised By: Print Steve Howard Sign ................ ............................. Amendment List

Iss. / Rev. Iss. / Rev Date

Remove Insert

Page Iss. / Rev. Page Iss. / Rev. 1 4/7/11

Final 5/9/11

0201SF10 07/08/02 Filename: I:\EAI\SY all\Economy Team\02. Infrastructure\02. CIL\03 County Council workstreams\SICP\Cumulative Assessment - Final Report.docc

Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network


CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 Background 8 1.2 Aims and Objectives 9 1.3 Scope 9 1.4 Report Structure 10

2 MODEL DESCRIPTION 11 2.1 Context 11 2.2 Vehicle Types 11 2.3 Time Period 11 2.4 Assignment Method 11 2.5 Zoning System 12 2.6 Study Area 12

3 ESTIMATION OF TRIP RATES 14 3.1 Trip Generation 14 3.2 Planning Data & TRICS Trip Generation 14 3.3 TEMPRO Trip Generation 16

4 SCENARIOS AND FORECAST MATRICES 17 4.1 Modelled Scenarios 17 4.2 Additional Trips 17 4.3 Largest Increases in Trips 21 4.4 Forecast Matrices 29

5 MODELLING RESULTS 36 5.1 Summary Network Statistics 36 5.2 Strategic Route Network Journey Times 38 5.3 Cost of Congestion compared to Volume/Capacity Ratio 43 5.4 Volume/Capacity Ratio 49 5.5 Difference in Flow 57 5.6 Merge and Diverge Assessment of the SRN 66

6 CONCLUSION 70 6.1 Context 70 6.2 Traffic Impacts on the SRN in Surrey 71 6.3 Traffic Impacts on the LRN of Surrey 72 6.4 Summary of Impacts 73 6.5 Conclusions 74 6.6 Limitations of Study 75



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Surrey Infrastructure Capacity Project (SICP) is an exciting and innovative initiative. The project was set up to establish infrastructure planning to help manage the housing, employment, population and economic growth planned for Surrey between now and 2026. The project allows Surrey County Council to assess current and future countywide infrastructure requirements alongside the 11 district and borough councils, Surrey Police, Surrey Primary Care Trust, the business community and other key infrastructure and service providers including transport, utilities, education and health.

The project was also a response to the strong perception that Surrey has developed without adequate infrastructure, resulting in a deficit in provision in some parts of the county. This is because growth has spread unevenly across Surrey leading to increased pressure on certain areas. The situation has not been helped by the pattern of housing development, which has traditionally been delivered on small sites that do not attract associated infrastructure provision, leading to a cumulative strain on existing facilities and services

This ‘Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network’ study was undertaken to consider the cumulative impacts of all known future development within Surrey, as well as large developments located externally to the County, with respect to highway capacity, to the likely additional traffic generated by committed and non-committed planned residential and commercial development, as proposed in the emerging Core Strategies of the Local Development Frameworks for the borough and districts in and around Surrey.

The main aims of the cumulative transport assessment were to:

• Evaluate the highway capacity impacts of the cumulative county-wide strategic development within Surrey and large developments external to Surrey;

• Assist in assessing the sensitivity of both the Strategic Route Network (SRN) and Local Road Network (LRN), including classified A and B roads to satisfy the Highways Agency (HA) responsible for the SRN, and Surrey County Council (SCC) the designated highway authority for the LRN, on the ability of the highway network to cope with the predicted future traffic demand;

• Assist in identifying specific locations which may require additional infrastructure provision for transport services;

• And contribute towards the development and adoption of a costed strategic infrastructure schedule at a county-wide level.

The main objectives of the cumulative transport assessment were to:

• Identify the amounts and locations of additional commercial and residential development in Surrey and the large developments external to the County;

• Calculate the distribution of vehicle trips resulting from the additional development;

• Forecast the traffic impacts of individual developments on the SRN and LRN; • Act as a starting point for identifying locations which may either require additional

infrastructure provision for transport services or further study to identify appropriate mitigation measures;

• Report the likely highway capacity impacts on both SRN and LRN.

The main benefit of this approach was to ensure that any strategic infrastructure requirements identified could be used to support the districts and boroughs needs to produce local Infrastructure Delivery Plans (IDP) using a common and consistent strategic



evidence base. This evidence base could also be used to support future bids for Central Government funding for transport infrastructure and services.

The transport assessment used the strategic Surrey County Transport Model (SINTRAM V4.1) in conjunction with the OmniTRANS modelling software suite to evaluate highway capacity impacts on both the SRN and LRN, at present SINTRAM is unable to accurately assess queuing and individual driver behaviour at junctions or assess the provision of Public Transport such as bus and rail. SINTRAM encapsulates the detailed road network, including key junction for Surrey and surrounding local authorities and has been developed to meet the requirements of the Department of Transport (DfT) modelling guidance (WebTAG).

The SINTRAM model assess link capacity and therefore indicates which road sections are likely to experience delays as a result of traffic demand exceeding capacity with a consequent reduction in vehicle speeds. It can also indicate how traffic diverts away from busy routes (i.e. re-distribution effects), where traffic is slowed because of excessive demand, and adds to flows on secondary routes that may be less suitable and hence more sensitive to changes in flows. Thus making it a reasonable tool to assess the impacts of future development at a strategic county-wide level.

The transport assessment is currently based on an average AM peak hour (0700-1000) and includes a base year of 2011 and a forecast year of 2026.

The following scenarios have been included in this assessment: • 2011 Base; • 2026 Do-Nothing (includes growth for all of Great Britain, except Surrey and

external developments, defined as the study area for this assessment); • 2026 Do-Something (includes growth for all areas).

Main Outcomes

Analysis of the available planning data suggests that in the 2026 Do-Something scenario the modelled zone in Surrey to incur the largest amount of estimated additional departure trips is zone 379 Ottershaw (Runnymede) with a projected increase of 758 departure trips. Whereas zone 383 Addlestone Moor (Runnymede) is projected to gain the largest amount of estimated additional arrival trips, 282 trips. Explanation as to why zone 379 Ottershaw is estimated to incur the largest amount of departure trips is related to the redevelopment of the former Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) site, that is located in close proximity to the zone in Runnymede. Modelled zones in the borough of Reigate and Banstead are predicted to incur the largest proportion of additional trips in the 2026 Do-Something, compared to all other Surrey borough/districts.

The main outcomes of this cumulative assessment are based on aggregations of modelled outputs from network summary statistics including vehicle kilometrage, travel times and average speeds and the relationships between them. Detailed analysis has been undertaken on the SRN by comparing journey times. Known congestion ‘bottlenecks’ have been assessed by comparing current cost of congestion data against volume capacity ratio plots. Traffic flow and congestion impacts between scenarios have been ranked for both the SRN and LRN and finally a highway capacity assessment has been undertaken on several motorway merges and diverges.

The main results for both the SRN and LRN are summarised in the table below. The table is based on the greatest changes in flow, density and speed between 2026 Do-Something and 2026 Do Nothing modelled scenarios.



Criteria SRN LRN

Journey Time • M3 Junction 4 to 1 (specifically Junction 3 to 2)

• A23 corridor • A320 corridor

Volume/Capacity Ratio

• M25 Junctions 13 to 14 • M3 Junctions 4 to 1 • A3 from Ripley to M25 Wisley

Interchange

• Horley Rd/ Mill Ln, westbound (Reigate & Banstead)

• Chobham Ln, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, northbound (Runnymede)

• A245/B382 Old Woking Rd, westbound (Woking)

Difference in Flow

• M25 Junction 11 to 13 • M25 J13 to 11 • M23 J10 to 8

• B386 Holloway Hill, Green Ln, eastbound (Runnymede)

• Chobham Rd, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, northbound (Runnymede)


• A331 Blackwater Valley Route, northbound (Surrey Heath)

The table above highlights sections of both the SRN and LRN within Surrey that are sensitive to reasonably significant increases in traffic flow, exacerbating and prolonging existing levels of congestion, resulting in reduced levels of service and reduced journey time reliability during the am peak hour for local roads in and around urban areas and on the approaches and along the mainline of the SRN.

The analysis suggests that although major additional highway capacity infrastructure investment such as motorway widening, or local bypasses is not necessary to meet the demands of future development, other types of highway capital schemes in some urban areas, at key junctions and other sensitive locations will be required in order to promote and manage the additional demand due to the future development. These schemes will not necessarily create additional capacity but which will assist in managing or improving journey time reliability and levels of service by managing the impacts to ensure congestion - both delay and journey time reliability - does not deteriorate beyond current levels.

Given that providing additional capacity is no longer considered to be the best solution except in certain locations and for particular circumstances, a mix of solutions will be required involving a wide range of tools. This mix of solutions includes demand management, integrated land use & transport planning, network management, traffic management, freight & goods management and behavioural change. Many of these solutions are contained within Surrey’s recently adopted Surrey Transport Plan (STP3) which include strategies and associated toolkits to provide adequate mitigation measures and assist in the formulation of robust Infrastructure Delivery Plans.

The results and analysis of this cumulative assessment of future development impacts in Surrey, have been presented and endorsed by the ‘Surrey Infrastructure Project Board’ in July 2011.

Limitations of Study

Given the strategic nature of the highway capacity assessment and modelling methodology used there are a number of limitations which need to be considered during the preparation and interpretation of the highway capacity impacts on both the SRN and LRN within this report which are set out below.



The results presented in this report are based on local planning estimates from the emerging Core Strategies of the boroughs and districts, which are all at different stages within the LDF process, and are based on estimates available as of February 2010, hence, any future changes to the size and distribution of housing and commercial provision may alter the impacts and interpretation of the analysis of this assessment.

The limitations of the planning estimates (such as the varying degrees of available planning data internally and external to Surrey and the uncertainty of the size, distribution and land-use of any future planned developments) the interpretation of the likely impacts on both the SRN and LRN within this assessment should be treated as broad strategic projections, and as such further work would be recommended, (including complementary analysis using appropriate modelling \ assessment tools), to further assist in the identification of additional infrastructure needs and other potential mitigation measures at a more local and detailed level.

The cumulative county-wide transport assessment assumes that all the committed and non-committed planned estimates of development would occur simultaneously and that any impacts described in this report do not account for any possible mitigation, demand management or infrastructure provision and effectively present a worse case situation.



1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.1.1 The Surrey Infrastructure Capacity Project (SICP) is an exciting and innovative initiative. The project was set up to establish infrastructure planning to help manage the housing, employment, population and economic growth planned for Surrey between now and 2026. The project allows Surrey County Council to assess current and future countywide infrastructure requirements alongside the 11 district and borough councils, Surrey Police, Surrey Primary Care Trust, the business community and other key infrastructure and service providers including transport, utilities, education and health.

1.1.2 The project was also a response to the strong perception that Surrey has developed without adequate infrastructure, resulting in a deficit in provision in some parts of the county. This is because growth has spread unevenly across Surrey leading to increased pressure on certain areas. The situation has not been helped by the pattern of housing development, which has traditionally been delivered on small sites that do not attract associated infrastructure provision, leading to a cumulative strain on existing facilities and services

1.1.3 This ‘Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network’ study was undertaken to consider the cumulative impacts of all known future development within Surrey, as well as large developments located externally to the County, with respect to highway capacity, to the likely additional traffic generated by committed and non-committed planned residential and commercial development, as proposed in the emerging Core Strategies of the Local Development Frameworks for the borough and districts in and around Surrey.

1.1.4 The aim of this project is to assess projected cumulative impacts on the strategic and local highway network in Surrey, as a result of additional traffic generated from projected future development, between 2011 and 2026.

1.1.5 The assessment takes account of all development within Surrey, as well as large development pressures located external to the County that are in close proximity to the boundary (including the borough of Rushmoor, Aldershot Urban Extension (AUE), the district of Hart, Bordon, Crawley, East Grinstead, Haywards Heath and Horsham).

1.1.6 The investigation into the cumulative impact of all such development was performed using the Strategic County Transport Model (SINTRAM).

1.1.7 SCC’s Transport Studies modelling team have previously assisted many of Surrey’s borough/districts with Transport Assessments (TA) in relation to their Local Development Frameworks (LDF) and Core Strategies (CS), using SINTRAM. The purpose of these assessments was to determine the sensitivity of the strategic and local highway network to the proposed future developments (commercial and residential) between 2005 and 2026. However, these assessments were all conducted in isolation and therefore only indicated projected highway impacts based on the individual boroughs/districts proposed developments. Such assessments have been completed for the following Surrey boroughs/districts:

• Reigate and Banstead



• Mole Valley • Elmbridge • Waverley • Woking • Runnymede • Surrey Heath (joint with Hampshire borough/districts of Rushmoor and Hart to

create the Transport Assessment for the M3 Corridor J3 – 4a Joint LDF Study).

1.2 Aims and Objectives

1.2.1 The main aims of the cumulative transport assessment were to:





1.2.2 The main objectives of the cumulative transport assessment were to:



• Forecast the traffic impacts of individual developments on the SRN and LRN; • Act as a starting point for identifying locations which may either require

additional infrastructure provision for transport services or further study to identify appropriate mitigation measures;


1.2.3 The main benefit of this approach was to ensure that any strategic infrastructure requirements identified could be used to support the districts and boroughs needs to produce local Infrastructure Delivery Plans (IDP) using a common and consistent strategic evidence base. This evidence base could also be used to support future bids for Central Government funding for transport infrastructure and services.

1.3 Scope

1.3.1 The assessment uses the strategic County transport model (SINTRAM V4.1) and OmniTRANS transport modelling software as the modelling tool in this assessment.

1.3.2 For comparison purposes a 2011 base year and 2026 Do-Nothing scenario were developed as references. This is described later in Section 4. For this element of the study, one modelled network was used throughout the assessment, and this network reflects the road network in its current state (the Hindhead Improvement



Scheme was not modelled). Base and forecast scenario matrices were developed using trip generation derived from borough/districts planning data along with the Trip Rate Information Computer System (TRICS) database and forecasts from the Trip End Model Programme (TEMPRO).

1.3.3 The assessment only considers the impacts on highway capacity at a strategic level and as such the modelling methodology employed is unable to answer detailed questions regarding traffic interactions, such as queuing and individual driver behaviour at junctions. It does not consider other travel modes such as Public Transport including buses and rail.

1.4 Report Structure

1.4.1 This technical report describes both the methodology and highway capacity implications from the transport assessment of cumulative impacts from future development. The technical report is structured as listed below:

- Section 2: A description of the model and it’s constraints; - Section 3: The estimation of trip rates for the proposed developments and

scenarios; - Section 4: The development and summary results of the forecasting

methodology; - Section 5: Analysis and results of the modelling work undertaken, including

network statistics, changes in traffic flow and capacity assessments;

- Section 6: Main conclusions of the impacts on both the SRN and LRN and summary of evaluation.

1.4.2 To accompany this technical report, a technical annex has been produced as a

separate document containing additional reference information, including:

- Appendix A: Modelled Zone Plans of Surrey Borough \ Districts - Appendix B: Origin & Destination Trip Ends for Modelled Zones in Surrey - Appendix C: Flow Charts detailing Forecasting Methodologies - Appendix D: DMRB Volume 6 Section 2 Junction Layout Geometry Guidance - Appendix E: Assessment of M25 Junctions based on DMRB Guidance



2 MODEL DESCRIPTION

2.1 Context

2.1.1 The County model (SINTRAM Version 4.1_SICP_110615) was used to evaluate the cumulative assessment of future development proposals. SINTRAM is a strategic model that encapsulates the road network of Surrey and surrounding local authorities; at a national level the model incorporates all strategic roads within Great Britain.

2.1.2 All motorways, A and B roads together with some local roads are explicitly modelled within SINTRAM. Where traffic junctions and traffic signals are likely to have significant effects, the details of their general layout or timing of the signals are also included in the modelling. However, strategic modelling uses aggregate descriptions of traffic such as flow, density and speed, as well as the relationships between them and hence does not include every road or junction. As a result the model is unable to answer detailed questions regarding traffic interactions, such as queuing and individual driver behaviour. It can, however, provide approximate answers to a wide range of transport problems (i.e. re-distribution effects), making it a reasonable tool for the cumulative transport assessment and assessing potential impacts on the strategic and local network within the County.

2.1.3 The SINTRAM model assesses link capacity and therefore indicates which road sections are likely to experience delays as a result of traffic demand exceeding capacity with a consequent reduction in vehicle speeds. It can also indicate how traffic diverts away from busy routes (i.e. re-distribution effects), where traffic is slowed because of excessive demand, and adds to flows on secondary routes that may be less suitable and hence more sensitive to changes in flows. Thus making it a reasonable tool for the strategic cumulative assessment of development in the County until the forecast year of 2026.

2.2 Vehicle Types

2.2.1 Cars, LGVs and HGVs are separately represented in the model. Trips by public transport are not modelled.

2.3 Time Period

2.3.1 The evaluation was performed for the average hour of the AM peak period (0700 – 1000 hours).

2.4 Assignment Method

2.4.1 A fixed matrix equilibrium assignment was performed using the Method of Successive Averages (MSA). This is an assignment using user equilibrium with optional Burrell type perturbations. The assignment allocates given travel demand (a set of trips with fixed origins and destinations) on the modelled network in order to obtain distribution of traffic flow. The resulting traffic flow represents the ‘average’ conditions for the time period under study. The assignment was performed for 80 iterations with a spreadfactor of 0.5 for all modelled scenarios.



2.5 Zoning System

2.5.1 SINTRAM makes use of a zoning system. Zones within Surrey are based on national census output areas, whereas zones external to the County cover larger areas and are generally less refined in comparison, (a result of being located outside the models key study area, Surrey). See Appendix A for a modelled zone plan of every borough in Surrey.

2.6 Study Area

2.6.1 The study area of this assessment covers all modelled zones within Surrey as well as zones covering large external development pressures to the County, such as the borough of Rushmoor, Bordon etc. Figure 2.1 shows all modelled zones that additional trips were incorporated to in this assessment. However, it should be noted that all modelling results and analysis presented in this report, is for the SRN and LRN within the Surrey boundaries only.


Issue No. Final Page 13 Document No. 3380\SICP\01

Figure 2.1: Study area defined by modelled zone boundaries (all Surrey zones and zones covering known large developments external to the County).

Borough of Rushmoor

District of Hart

Bordon Horhsam

Haywards Heath

Crawley

East Grinstead

NKey Zone boundaries of zones in study area



3 ESTIMATION OF TRIP RATES

3.1 Trip Generation

3.1.1 Two sources were used to establish the trip generation for the study area (all modelled zones in Surrey and zones covering specific large external developments to Surrey) included in this assessment. These sources were: • Borough/district planning data with use of TRICS (version 2010(a)); • TEMPRO (version 5.4).

3.1.2 Table 3.1 informs which source of trip generation was utilised for all areas/developments in the study area.

Area / Development Source of Trip Generation Elmbridge BC Planning data with TRICS Epsom & Ewell BC TEMPRO Guildford BC TEMPRO Mole Valley DC Planning data with TRICS Reigate & Banstead BC Planning data with TRICS Runnymede BC Planning data with TRICS Spelthorne BC TEMPRO Surrey Heath BC Planning data with TRICS Tandridge DC TEMPRO Waverley BC Planning data with TRICS Woking BC Planning data with TRICS Rushmoor BC (including AUE) Planning data with TRICS Hart DC Planning data with TRICS Bordon TEMPRO Crawley TEMPRO East Grinstead TEMPRO Haywards Heath TEMPRO Horsham TEMPRO

Table 3.1: Source of trip generation for all areas/developments involved in the assessment

3.1.3 It was thought appropriate to include projected large developments that are external to Surrey but in close proximity to the County boundary in this assessment. This will ensure that any traffic impacts related to these developments that may impact upon Surrey are accounted for. It is likely that traffic generated from such large external developments will travel in/out of Surrey due to their close proximity. The developments external to Surrey that have been included in this assessment are as follows: • All developments in the borough of Rushmoor (including AUE); • All developments in the district of Hart; • Bordon • Crawley • East Grinstead • Haywards Heath • Horsham

3.2 Planning Data & TRICS Trip Generation

3.2.1 As SCC has previously been involved in a number of the County’s borough/districts LDFs, current and future planning was readily available.



3.2.2 Planning data was available for seven of the eleven County’s boroughs which detailed the committed and planned commercial and residential developments from 2005 to 2026.

3.2.3 The planning data contained two key categories of development: commercial and residential. It reflects the borough/districts estimates of development to occur between 2005 and 2026. Details of these estimated developments were also provided, including the estimated location and size of developments.

3.2.4 The planning data provided details of whether each development had been committed by planning permission or not. Status of planning permission affects the implications of developments because it is not possible to influence the developments that have received planning permission. However, the planning data did not detail the years that the developments occurred or are proposed to occur. Due to this it was assumed that all committed developments was dated between 2005 and 2011, whereas all non-committed planned developments was dated between 2011 and 2026.

3.2.5 Development trip rates were obtained from TRICS with use of the planning data. A trip rate refers to the amount of trips generated by a development. These include both trips that arrive and depart from a development.

3.2.6 The TRICS database stores information recorded from past surveys completed in the UK for a range of locations and land uses, counting the number of vehicular trips made to and from individual sites. The TRICS database allows users to select sites that are relevant and similar in criteria to a development site in question. This enables the estimation of trip rates to and from proposed developments based on past surveyed sites.

3.2.7 It should be noted that TRICS is a ‘subjective tool’. This is because personal choice and judgement plays a key role in decision making when choosing appropriate sites to compare with the existing and proposed developments.

3.2.8 TRICS Good Practice Guide 2009 was followed for the interrogation of the database to determine comparative sites.

3.2.9 Trip rates produced from the TRICS database were calculated as a trip rate estimate per 100m² gross floor area (GFA) for commercial developments, and per household for residential developments. Estimates were then applied to the relevant (GFA) or number of households for each development, by modelled zone.

3.2.10 Trip rate estimates were generated for both the existing and proposed developments (where possible due to data limitations) using the TRICS database. Therefore it was possible to calculate the additional amount of trips per development by deducting the existing trip rate from the proposed.

3.2.11 Three vehicles types are modelled within SINTRAM: Cars, LGVs and HGVs. Consequently vehicle proportions were calculated for these vehicle types from the corresponding surveys in the TRICS database.

3.2.12 Whilst different trip rates were generated for each category of development for each land use, trip rates also needed to be extracted to appropriate corresponding (TRICS) locations. The (TRICS) database classifies all surveys conducted at a development as one of the following:



• town centre; • edge of town centre; • neighbourhood centre; • suburban area; • edge of town and • free standing.

3.2.13 The methodology for assigning a TRICS location to each development differed between the developments, depending whether detailed locations were provided in the planning data. The developments that provided addresses for each development had a precise TRICS location assigned. Whereas, the developments that did not have precise locations were awarded a TRICS location based on the entire or proportion of the relevant modelled zone. TRICS locations were defined by use of local knowledge and aerial photography.

3.2.14 The planning data utilised in this assessment is the same as what was used previously in the individual borough/districts assessments. Therefore the planning data may not be as recent for some boroughs, but due to time constraints it was not feasible to re-visit all boroughs and ask for a re-evaluation of the planning data. This is also the reason why it was not possible to utilise detailed planning data for all other areas/developments in the study area.

3.3 TEMPRO Trip Generation

3.3.1 At the time of this cumulative assessment being conducted SCC did not possess planning data for the entire study area of the assessment. Planning data was absent for four of SCC borough/districts (Guildford, Epsom and Ewell, Spelthorne and Tandridge) and all external developments to the County with exception to the borough of Rushmoor and district of Hart. Therefore it was not possible to calculate the estimated amount trip rates for all areas involved in the study area by use of TRICS. Therefore TEMPRO forecasts were used for trip generation in zones where planning data was not available.

3.3.2 TEMPRO (version 5.4) was used to extract the trip generation for a 2026 forecast. TEMPRO forecasts had already been extracted prior to this assessment for use in the County models demand matrices. As such the trip generation that was stored in the SINTRAM matrices was manipulated to represent the trip generation between 2005 and 2026 for zones that planning data was not available for. See Section 4 and Appendix C for more detail on the methodology involved in manipulating TEMPRO forecasts/SINTRAM demand matrices.

3.3.3 Both TRICS and TEMPRO are industry standard software and conform to current government guideline methodologies.



4 SCENARIOS AND FORECAST MATRICES

4.1 Modelled Scenarios

4.1.1 For the purposes of this assessment it was thought best to create three modelled scenarios: • 2011 Base; • 2026 Do-Nothing; • 2026 Do-Something.

4.1.2 Trip ends are the total number of trips that either have an origin (origin/departure trip ends) or destination (destination/arrival trip ends) within a defined modelled zone.

4.1.3 The 2011 Base represents the current situation and as such all trip ends are for 2011.

4.1.4 The 2026 Do-Nothing is where all trip ends external to the study area are for 2026, but trip ends within the study area (study area defined as Surrey zones and the zones in the borough of Rushmoor, district of Hart, Bordon, Crawley, East Grinstead, Haywards Heath and Horsham) are for the 2011 base year. Therefore the 2026 Do-Nothing represents the traffic impacts in Surrey as a result of the rest of the Country’s development to the forecast year of 2026, as no future development occurs in the study area (as this is retained at the base year).

4.1.5 The 2026 Do-Something is the same as the 2026 Do-Nothing, but includes the 2011 to 2026 proposed development (non-committed planned estimated development) in the study area. Therefore the 2026 Do-Something is where all trip ends in the model represent the forecast year of 2026.

4.1.6 All three modelled scenarios were created using both sources of trip generation; planning data combined with TRICS and TEMPRO forecasts. Therefore the modelled scenarios make use of accurate planning data to enable trip generation where possible, instead of wholly relying on TEMPRO forecasts.

4.1.7 The 2011 base acts as a reference case for the 2026 Do-Nothing and the 2026 Do-Nothing acts as a reference for the 2026 Do-Something.

4.2 Additional Trips

4.2.1 Tables 4.1 to 4.4 display a summary of the trip ends (for all modelled vehicles) by borough/district for the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something. The absolute and percentage difference in trip ends shows the growth in trip ends between the scenarios and the relevant references.

4.2.2 Table 4.1 indicates that there are no changes in departure trip ends within Surrey between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing. This is because Surrey trip ends are restrained to the 2011 base year in the 2026 Do-Nothing. Table 4.1 shows that the borough of Reigate and Banstead is likely to incur the largest increase (16.5%) in departure trip ends within Surrey in the 2026 Do-Something (when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing), followed by the boroughs of Woking (12.6% increase) and Runnymede (10.5% increase).

4.2.3 Table 4.2 states the three boroughs that contain the largest proportions of total departure trips in the County are Guildford (16.3%, 16.3% and 15.9%), Reigate



and Banstead (11.4%, 11.4% and 12.3%) and Elmbridge (10.7%, 10.7% and 10.4%) in the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something respectively.

4.2.4 Table 4.3 indicates that there is a minimal increase in arrival trip ends in Surrey (135 trips) in the 2026 Do-Nothing, shown by a comparison to the 2011 base. This increase occurs, (even though the trip ends stay the same as the 2011 base year) as a result of the forecasting methodology using the furness method, which ends on a row balance, to create the 2026 Do-Nothing matrix. The furness method is a way of incorporating additional trips to a matrix, and the model does this by trying to add the trips to the relevant origin (rows) and destinations (columns) cells in the matrix. A matrix must balance the row and column totals, but a compromise is generally made to ensure the matrix totals balance, the compromise consists of a small amount of extra trips being added to the model. However, it is possible to state if the matrix balances to rows or columns, and in the case of the Do-Nothing, a row balance was chosen (as have greater reliance on origin data in AM peak hour). This row balance ensured that the desired amount of additional trips was added to the rows of the matrix and the small extra amount of trips (compromise) was added to the columns. Hence, no difference in origin trip ends being shown between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing in Table 4.1 and 4.2, but an additional 135 destination trips between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing being displayed in Table 4.3 and 4.4.

4.2.5 However, 135 additional trips generated from a furness method is a very minor amount in a model of this size, as shown by the percentage increases in Table 4.3 (all below 0.2%).

4.2.6 The largest increase in arrival trip ends in the County between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something is an additional 1,669 arrival trips (11.1% increase) in the borough of Reigate and Banstead.

4.2.7 Table 4.4 states that the three boroughs that incur the largest proportions of total arrival trips in the County are Guildford (15.6%, 15.6% and 15.5%), Reigate and Banstead (10.9%, 10.9% and 11.3%) and Elmbridge (10.6%, 10.6% and 10.3%) in the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something respectively.

4.2.8 Therefore the borough of Reigate and Banstead incurs the largest increase in both departure (16.5% increase) and arrival trips (11.1% increase) in the 2026 Do-Something scenario (when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing).

4.2.9 See Appendix B for trip ends (departure/origin and arrival/destination) for each modelled zone in Surrey.



Origin (Departure) Trip Ends Absolute Difference Percentage Difference

Borough/District 2011 2026 Do-

Nothing 2026 Do-

Something

2026 Do-Nothing less

2011

2026 Do-Something

less 2026 Do-Nothing


2011

2026 Do-Something


Elmbridge 14,101 14,101 14,714 0 613 0.0% 4.3% Epsom & Ewell 8,588 8,588 9,366 0 778 0.0% 9.1% Guildford 21,358 21,358 22,571 0 1,213 0.0% 5.7% Mole Valley 10,323 10,323 10,883 0 560 0.0% 5.4% Reigate & Banstead 14,949 14,949 17,411 0 2,462 0.0% 16.5% Runnymede 9,549 9,549 10,552 0 1,003 0.0% 10.5% Spelthorne 11,158 11,158 11,960 0 802 0.0% 7.2% Surrey Heath 7,921 7,921 8,607 0 686 0.0% 8.7% Tandridge 9,898 9,898 10,459 0 561 0.0% 5.7% Waverley 13,380 13,380 14,095 0 715 0.0% 5.3% Woking 10,053 10,053 11,317 0 1,264 0.0% 12.6% Total 131,278 131,278 141,935 0 10,657 0% 8% Table 4.1: Average AM (0700 – 1000) peak hour origin (departure) trip ends for all modelled vehicles and scenarios within Surrey

Origin (Departure) Trip Ends Borough/District 2011 2026 Do-

Nothing 2026 Do-

Something Elmbridge 10.7% 10.7% 10.4% Epsom & Ewell 6.5% 6.5% 6.6% Guildford 16.3% 16.3% 15.9% Mole Valley 7.9% 7.9% 7.7% Reigate & Banstead 11.4% 11.4% 12.3% Runnymede 7.3% 7.3% 7.4% Spelthorne 8.5% 8.5% 8.4% Surrey Heath 6.0% 6.0% 6.1% Tandridge 7.5% 7.5% 7.4% Waverley 10.2% 10.2% 9.9% Woking 7.7% 7.7% 8.0% Total 100% 100% 100%

Table 4.2: Percentage breakdown of origin (departure) trip ends within Surrey



Destination (Arrival) Trip Ends Absolute Difference Percentage Difference

Borough/District 2011 2026 Do-

Nothing 2026 Do-

Something


2011

2026 Do-Something



2011

2026 Do-Something


Elmbridge 14,713 14,723 15,277 10 554 0.1% 3.8% Epsom & Ewell 9,373 9,380 9,908 7 528 0.1% 5.6% Guildford 21,578 21,598 22,872 20 1,274 0.1% 5.9% Mole Valley 11,024 11,034 11,716 10 682 0.1% 6.2% Reigate & Banstead 15,033 15,069 16,738 36 1,669 0.2% 11.1% Runnymede 11,277 11,289 12,463 12 1,174 0.1% 10.4% Spelthorne 12,021 12,030 12,526 9 496 0.1% 4.1% Surrey Heath 8,304 8,311 8,854 7 543 0.1% 6.5% Tandridge 11,072 11,078 11,616 6 538 0.1% 4.9% Waverley 14,002 14,014 14,718 12 704 0.1% 5.0% Woking 10,030 10,036 10,983 6 947 0.1% 9.4% Total 138,427 138,562 147,671 135 9,109 0% 7% Table 4.3: Average AM (0700 – 1000) peak hour destination (arrival) trip ends for all modelled vehicles and scenarios within Surrey

Destination (Arrival) Trip Ends Borough/District 2011 2026 Do-

Nothing 2026 Do-

Something Elmbridge 10.6% 10.6% 10.3% Epsom & Ewell 6.8% 6.8% 6.7% Guildford 15.6% 15.6% 15.5% Mole Valley 8.0% 8.0% 7.9% Reigate & Banstead 10.9% 10.9% 11.3% Runnymede 8.1% 8.1% 8.4% Spelthorne 8.7% 8.7% 8.5% Surrey Heath 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% Tandridge 8.0% 8.0% 7.9% Waverley 10.1% 10.1% 10.0% Woking 7.2% 7.2% 7.4% Total 100% 100% 100%

Table 4.4: Percentage breakdown of destination (arrival) trip ends within Surrey



4.3 Largest Increases in Trips

4.3.1 Tables 4.5 and 4.6 show the top twenty modelled zones within Surrey that have the largest amount of origin (departure) and destination (arrival) trip ends in the 2011 base matrix.

4.3.2 The area of the modelled zones (in hectares) is also displayed. It should be noted that the largest modelled zone in Surrey covers an area of 4,767 hectares (zone 320, Elstead & Thursley, Waverley).

Zone No. Zone Name Borough/District

2011 Origin

Trip Ends

Area of Zone

(Hectares)

No. of Trips to

One Hectare

73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 2,434 3,249 0.75 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 1,640 380 4.32 318 Stoughton Guildford 1,180 123 9.59 279 Park Barn Guildford 1,113 131 8.50 454 Sunbury Common Spelthorne 1,078 174 6.20 415 Leatherhead Mole Valley 1,004 617 1.63 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 978 328 2.98 450 Sunbury & Kempton Park Spelthorne 973 366 2.67 94 Burpham Guildford 958 222 4.32 298 Rydes Hill Guildford 950 109 8.72 455 West Bedfont Spelthorne 933 252 3.70 452 Ashford Common Spelthorne 926 154 6.01 385 Chertsey Runnymede 886 545 1.63 398 Merstham Reigate & Banstead 872 938 0.93 431 Walton on Thames Reservoirs Elmbridge 862 583 1.48 448 Staines - Kingston Rd (east) Spelthorne 857 131 6.54 519 Worplesdon Guildford 857 1,109 0.77 396 Nork Reigate & Banstead 852 363 2.35 408 Dorking - south Mole Valley 846 402 2.10 446 Laleham Spelthorne 840 1,070 0.79 Table 4.5: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest origin (departure) trip ends in 2011 base




2011 Destination Trip Ends

Area of Zone

(Hectares)

No. of Trips to

One Hectare

73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 1,958 3,249 0.60 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 1,806 380 4.75 454 Sunbury Common Spelthorne 1,353 174 7.76 407 Holmwood Mole Valley 1,339 1,325 1.01 329 Hindhead Waverley 1,229 682 1.80 383 Addlestone Moor Runnymede 1,208 306 3.95 385 Chertsey Runnymede 1,192 545 2.19 450 Sunbury & Kempton Park Spelthorne 1,174 366 3.21 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 1,130 328 3.45 318 Stoughton Guildford 1,127 123 9.16 278 Onslow Village Guildford 1,110 133 8.35 408 Dorking - south Mole Valley 1,104 402 2.75 448 Staines - Kingston Rd (east) Spelthorne 1,084 131 8.27 298 Rydes Hill Guildford 1,067 109 9.79 386 Thorpe Runnymede 1,043 856 1.22 445 Staines - Laleham Rd Spelthorne 1,009 217 4.65 415 Leatherhead Mole Valley 999 617 1.62 397 Banstead Reigate & Banstead 991 462 2.15 384 Englefld Green Runnymede 981 670 1.46 279 Park Barn Guildford 973 131 7.43

Table 4.6: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest destination (arrival) trip ends in 2011 base

4.3.3 Tables 4.5 and 4.6 report that zone 73 (Ash & Normandy) and 186 (Knaphill / St. Johns) contain the largest amount of origin (departure) trip ends, as well as destination (arrival) trip ends, in the 2011 base scenario.

4.3.4 These zones appear both in Tables 4.5 and 4.6 indicating that these zones with the largest amount of origins also contain some of the largest amount of destinations trip ends. Zones within the boroughs of Guildford and Spelthorne are featured most in the top twenty zones of origin and destination trip ends in the 2011 base. Zones highlighted in bold, in Tables 4.5 and 4.6, indicates that the entry occurs in the top twenty of both largest origin and destination trip ends.

4.3.5 Tables 4.7 and 4.8 show the top twenty modelled zones within Surrey that have the largest amount of origin and destination trip ends in the 2026 Do-Something matrix.

4.3.6 Data was not presented for the 2026 Do-Nothing, as the trip ends are virtually the same as the 2011 base (for the zones in Surrey) as shown by Tables 4.1 to 4.4.

4.3.7 It is important to note that the trip generation for the Surrey boroughs of Epsom & Ewell, Guildford, Spelthorne and Tandridge are purely based on TEMPRO forecasts.




2026 DS Origin Trip Ends

Area of Zone

(Hectares)

No. of Trips to

One Hectare

73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 2,649 3,249 0.82 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 1,774 380 4.67 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 1,518 328 4.63 379 Ottershaw Runnymede 1,512 1,835 0.82 318 Stoughton Guildford 1,267 123 10.30 279 Park Barn Guildford 1,212 131 9.25 415 Leatherhead Mole Valley 1,124 617 1.82 454 Sunbury Common Spelthorne 1,123 174 6.45 452 Ashford Common Spelthorne 1,036 154 6.73 450 Sunbury & Kempton Park Spelthorne 1,031 366 2.82 298 Rydes Hill Guildford 1,028 109 9.43 455 West Bedfont Spelthorne 1,005 252 1.91 94 Burpham Guildford 997 222 4.49 398 Merstham Reigate & Banstead 979 938 1.04 396 Nork Reigate & Banstead 951 363 2.62 105 Redhill - Marketfield Way Reigate & Banstead 939 159 5.91 446 Laleham Spelthorne 915 1,070 0.86 448 Staines - Kingston Rd (east) Spelthorne 914 131 6.98 431 Walton on Thames Reservoirs Elmbridge 908 583 1.56 408 Dorking - south Mole Valley 900 402 2.24 Table 4.7: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest origin (departure) trip ends in 2026 Do-Something


2026 DS Destination Trip Ends

Area of Zone

(Hectares)

No. of Trips to

One Hectare

73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 2,080 3,249 0.64 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 1,951 380 5.13 383 Addlestone Moor Runnymede 1,491 306 4.87 407 Holmwood Mole Valley 1,424 1,325 1.07 454 Sunbury Common Spelthorne 1,389 174 7.98 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 1,286 328 3.92 385 Chertsey Runnymede 1,272 545 2.33 329 Hindhead Waverley 1,259 682 1.85 450 Sunbury & Kempton Park Spelthorne 1,192 366 3.26 278 Onslow Village Guildford 1,190 133 8.95 318 Stoughton Guildford 1,184 123 9.63 408 Dorking - south Mole Valley 1,162 402 2.89 448 Staines - Kingston Rd (east) Spelthorne 1,136 131 8.67 298 Rydes Hill Guildford 1,124 109 10.31 386 Thorpe Runnymede 1,110 856 1.30 518 Doversgreen & South Park Reigate & Banstead 1,076 602 1.79 445 Staines - Laleham Rd Spelthorne 1,071 217 4.94 397 Banstead Reigate & Banstead 1,058 462 2.29 415 Leatherhead Mole Valley 1,042 617 1.69 279 Park Barn Guildford 1,035 131 7.90



Table 4.8: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest destination (arrival) trip ends in 2026 Do-Something



4.3.8 Zones highlighted in bold, in Tables 4.7 and 4.8, indicates that the entry occurs in the top twenty of both largest origin and destination trip ends.

4.3.9 Tables 4.7 and 4.8 indicate that the two zones that contain the largest origin and destination trip ends in the 2011 base (zones 73 and 186) continue to be prevalent in the 2026 Do-Something. However, the growth in trip ends in these zones is not thought to be very large, for example the largest increase is 215 origin trips in zone 73 (Ash & Normandy).

4.3.10 Comparisons of zones containing the largest trip ends in the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Something indicates that the trends remain relatively constant. However, a main difference concerning origin trip ends is the appearance of zones 379 (Ottershaw) and 105 (Redhill – Marketfield Way) in Table 4.7. This refers to an increase in origin trip ends in these two zones caused by proposed non-committed planned development between 2011 and 2026.

4.3.11 The trend displayed between the 2011 and 2026 destination trip ends also remains relatively constant, with exception to zone 518 (Doversgreen & South Park) as this zone appears in the top twenty of largest trip ends in the 2026 Do-Something, but not in the 2011 top twenty.

4.3.12 Figure 4.1 shows the disposition of additional departure trips projected to occur between 2011 and 2026 within Surrey, as well as the relevant large developments external to the County. Proportional circles plotted on the modelled network represent the additional departure trips. The areas of the circles are scaled to the zone containing the largest amount of additional departure trips.

4.3.13 Therefore Figure 4.1 presents a pictorial representation of the quantity and location of the additional departure trips between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something (in the study area this refers to 2011 to 2026 non-committed development).

4.3.14 The proportional circles are positioned at the top left of each zone centroid (the area of zone where traffic loads on and off of the network).



Figure 4.1: Additional departure (origin) trips between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, for all zones in Surrey and large developments external to the County i.e. 2011 to 2026 non-committed planned development.

N Key 343 Zone Number Circle proportional to amount of additional departure trips



4.3.15 Figure 4.1 indicates that the areas to incur the largest amount of additional departure trips in the 2026 Do-Something are external to County. Zone 491 Crawley South in West Sussex, is projected to generate some of the largest amounts of additional departure trips between 2011 and 2026. The zone containing the AUE development in Hampshire (zone 155 Aldershot Barracks) is also forecast to generate a large amount of additional departure trips.

4.3.16 Figure 4.1 indicates that there are multiple areas of the County, which are forecast to incur relative amounts of additional departure trips in the average AM peak hour in close proximity. Broadly these areas are the boroughs of Runnymede and Reigate and Banstead. This trend shown by Figure 4.1 has also been previously identified in Table 4.1, as these boroughs incur the largest proportions of additional departure trips in the 2026 Do-Something.

4.3.17 Tables 4.9 and 4.10 show the twenty zones within Surrey that incur the largest increases in trip ends between the 2026 Do-Nothing (essentially the 2011 base) and the 2026 Do-Something. The absolute differences as well as the percentage differences are displayed. Therefore Table 4.9 displays the same information shown in Figure 4.1, in absolute values, but only Surrey zones.

4.3.18 Tables 4.9 and 4.10 report that, within Surrey, zone 379 (Ottershaw) experiences the largest increase (758 trips) in departure trips and zone 383 (Addlestone Moor) experiences the largest increase (282 trips) in arrival trips, between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something.

4.3.19 Zones within the borough of Reigate and Banstead are featured most frequently in the twenty largest increases in departure and arrival trip ends. This correlates to information previously shown in Tables 4.1 and 4.3, as Reigate and Banstead is to incur the largest proportion of additional trips compared to all other Surrey borough/districts.

4.3.20 Two of the top five zones with largest increases in departure trip ends, zone 379 Ottershaw and 365 Deepcut & Mytchett contain some of the largest developments (in terms of size) forecast to occur within the County. The redevelopment of the former Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) site (in Runnymede) is projected to occur between 2011 and 2026, and as such is represented in this modelling, giving explanation as to why zone 379 contains the largest increase in departure trips. Secondly the redevelopment of the Princess Royal Barracks at Deepcut has also been included in this assessment, and is an explanation for why zone 365 contains the fifth largest increase in departure trips.




Absolute Difference (2026 DS less 2026

DN)

Percentage Difference(2026 DS less 2026

DN)

Area of Zone

(Hectares)

379 Ottershaw Runnymede 758 101% 1,835 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 540 55% 328 274 West Byfleet Town Centre Woking 468 224% 49 365 Deepcut & Mytchett Surrey Heath 325 64% 1,015 275 Woking Town Centre Woking 314 217% 24 73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 215 9% 3,249 105 Redhill - Marketfield Way Reigate & Banstead 175 23% 159 393 Kingswood Reigate & Banstead 152 22% 1,409 272 Gatton Park & Wray Park Reigate & Banstead 146 40% 442 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 134 8% 380 312 Redhill - Marketfield Way Reigate & Banstead 131 127% 159 166 Horley Town Centre Reigate & Banstead 124 19% 215 110 Reigate Rd / Linkfield Corner Reigate & Banstead 120 24% 95 415 Leatherhead Mole Valley 120 12% 617 461 Longmead & Horton Hospitals East Epsom & Ewell 113 17% 213 452 Ashford Common Spelthorne 110 12% 154 398 Merstham Reigate & Banstead 107 12% 938 462 Ruxley Lane Epsom & Ewell 104 14% 240 279 Park Barn Guildford 99 9% 131 396 Nork Reigate & Banstead 99 12% 363

Table 4.9: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest difference in origin (departure) trip ends between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something


Absolute Difference (2026 DS less 2026

DN)

Percentage Difference(2026 DS less 2026

DN)

Area of Zone

(Hectares

383 Addlestone Moor Runnymede 282 23% 306 387 New Haw Runnymede 202 38% 357 264 Horley - Meath Green Reigate & Banstead 155 14% 328 519 Worplesdon Guildford 146 19% 1,109 186 Knaphill / St Johns Woking 143 8% 380 518 Doversgreen & South Pk Reigate & Banstead 131 14% 602 73 Ash & Normandy Guildford 121 6% 3,249 105 Redhill - Marketfield Way Reigate & Banstead 117 15% 159 382 Addlestone Town Centre Runnymede 110 16% 264 398 Merstham Reigate & Banstead 110 12% 938 380 West Byfleet - Woodham Runnymede 104 22% 244 166 Horley Town Centre Reigate & Banstead 97 14% 215 374 Frimley & Frimley Hospital Surrey Heath 95 10% 214 110 Reigate Rd / Linkfield Corner Reigate & Banstead 87 16% 95 381 Row Town Runnymede 85 13% 318 407 Holmwood Mole Valley 84 6% 1,325 271 Horley - North East Reigate & Banstead 81 17% 269 278 Onslow Village Guildford 79 7% 133 385 Chertsey Runnymede 79 7% 545 272 Gatton Park & Wray Park Reigate & Banstead 74 16% 442

Table 4.10: Top twenty Surrey zones with largest difference in destination (arrival) trip ends between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something.



4.4 Forecast Matrices

4.4.1 To generate the 2011 base matrix it was necessary to first obtain TEMPRO trip end forecasts for the years of 2005 and 2011. 2011 trip ends where applied to all zones in the model that SCC does not possess planning data for, whereas 2005 trip ends where initially applied to all zones that SCC does possess planning data for. 2005 to 2011 trip rates (sourced from committed planning data and TRICS trip generation) were then added to the 2005 trip ends using the growth factor method, based on a row balance.

4.4.2 The 2011 base matrix was then utilised in the creation of the 2026 Do-Nothing forecast matrix. All trip ends in zones covering the study area were retained at the 2011 base year whereas all other trips in the model represent the forecast year of 2026. 2026 trip end forecasts for all other zones external to the study area were sourced from TEMPRO. All trips in the 2026 Do-Nothing were incorporated into the matrix by using the furness method, based on a row balance.

4.4.3 The 2026 Do-Something matrix was created by initially using the 2026 Do-Nothing matrix, and then adding the 2011 to 2026 additional trips to the zones in the study area (SCC and large developments external to the County). 2011 to 2026 additional trip rates were sourced from non-committed planning data and TRICS (for study area zones that SCC obtained planning data for) as well as TEMPRO trip end forecasts (for study area zones that SCC did not obtain planning data for). The additional forecast trip ends between 2011 and 2026 were incorporated into the matrix using the growth factor method, based on a row balance.

4.4.4 Use of a row (origin) balance in the growth factor method was thought preferable to a column (destination) balance as departure trips can be assumed to be more reliable in the AM time period. A row balance causes the matrix to balance according to the matrix row total, causing any balancing (adding/subtracting of any additional trips) to occur in the column totals of the matrix, making the row trip ends more accurate. It could therefore be said that this assessment is more reliable in terms of projected additional departure (origin) trips in the scenarios, as these trips have been incorporated in the model in an accurate method.

4.4.5 Additional trips added to the relevant zones of the forecast matrices follow the base AM distribution of individual zones. Such distributions were established during the model validation process. It was thought appropriate to use these base distributions as no information was provided, or obtained, regarding the future distribution of proposed developments.

4.4.6 See Appendix C for detailed flow charts describing the processes undertaken to create the 2011, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something matrices.

4.4.7 Figures 4.2 to 4.4 show a diagrammatic views of the trip ends incorporated in the 2011, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something matrices.



Figure 4.2: Diagrammatic view of trip ends incorporated in 2011 matrix

Figure 4.3: Diagrammatic view of trip ends incorporated in 2026 Do-Nothing matrix

Rest of Britain

Study Area

Rest of Britain tripends sourced from2011 TEMPROforecasts

Study Area trip ends either sourced from 2005TEMPRO forecasts plus 2005 – 2011 trip generation from committed developments planningdata/TRICS (for zones that SCC does possessplanning data for), or 2011 TEMPRO forecasts (forzones that SCC does not possess planning datafor).

Key 2011 Trip Ends

Study Area

Rest of Britain trip ends sourced from 2026 TEMPRO forecasts

Study Area trip ends sameas 2011 matrix, retained at2011 base year.

Key 2011 Trip Ends 2026 Trip Ends

Rest of Britain



Figure 4.4: Diagrammatic view of trip ends incorporated in 2026 Do-Something matrix

4.4.8 Tables 4.11 to 4.13 show the aggregated matrices for all modelled vehicle types for the AM average hour (0700 – 1000). The matrices have been aggregated into geographic sectors covering the borough/districts of Surrey, surrounding geographic areas and other areas of the Country.

4.4.9 Table 4.14 shows the matrix totals and intra County trips as well as the absolute and percentage differences between the modelled scenarios and the 2011 base year.

Study Area

Rest of Britain trip ends same as 2026 Do-Nothing matrix.

Study Area trip ends initially same as 2026 Do-Nothing matrix (2011). Then added 2011 – 2026 trip generation to the 2011 trip ends. 2011 – 2026 trips either sourced from non-committed developments planning data/TRICS (for zones that SCC does possess planning data for), or TEMPRO forecasts (for zones that SCCdoes not possess planning data for).

Key 2026 Trip Ends

Rest of Britain



E

lmbr

idge

Eps

om &

E

wel

l

Gui

ldfo

rd

Mol

e V

alle

y

Rei

gate

&

Ban

stea

d

Run

nym

ede

Spe

lthor

ne

Sur

rey

Hea

th

Tand

ridge

Wav

erle

y

Wok

ing

Rus

hmoo

r &

Har

t

Bor

don

Hor

sham

&

Cra

wle

y

E.G

rinst

ead

& H

.Hea

th

Lond

on

Res

t of

Brit

ain

Tota

l

Elmbridge 9,426 25 488 376 12 830 382 3 2 287 325 15 0 63 0 1,369 496 14,099

Epsom & Ewell 80 3,849 29 665 644 17 112 2 2 126 18 13 0 25 0 2,730 224 8,534

Guildford 251 9 12,168 418 225 50 54 173 54 2,104 1,242 835 7 4 30 2,077 1,713 21,414

Mole Valley 365 457 482 6,866 504 4 4 4 6 203 34 15 0 172 1 340 866 10,322

Reigate & Banstead 5 643 495 457 8,507 32 29 164 616 97 226 123 0 783 2 1,836 935 14,951

Runnymede 492 2 109 9 100 5,684 704 326 3 102 727 23 0 54 0 135 1,080 9,549

Spelthorne 372 30 82 3 62 1,643 5,794 11 1 12 94 4 0 19 0 2,141 887 11,156

Surrey Heath 3 1 260 7 36 202 15 4,915 80 48 421 945 3 26 0 138 821 7,921

Tandridge 6 6 175 20 767 2 3 127 5,760 35 53 11 0 236 272 1,333 1,092 9,896

Waverley 142 39 2,585 110 15 6 8 25 16 6,603 283 368 434 1 0 866 1,876 13,376

Woking 191 1 1,896 5 84 678 17 279 12 388 5,108 150 6 63 0 396 777 10,051

Rushmoor & Hart 11 12 411 22 25 51 41 647 4 653 86 12,171 52 0 0 1,436 4,706 20,328

Bordon 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 402 1 1 190 0 0 3 981 1,581

Horsham & Crawley 27 45 45 1,136 1,033 23 26 2 293 124 78 8 0 8,853 88 926 7,843 20,548

E.Grinstead & H.Heath 1 2 42 6 11 0 0 0 313 1 4 0 0 89 359 11 3,749 4,589

London 2,468 3,985 1,355 389 2,215 698 3,297 122 2,206 367 776 339 19 1,927 4 595,810 45,481 661,457

Rest of Britain 871 177 1,042 536 796 1,360 1,533 1,505 1,703 2,449 551 6,242 615 11,656 4,915 179,218 4,832,708 5,047,877

Total 14,712 9,282 21,667 11,024 15,035 11,278 12,019 8,304 11,070 14,001 10,026 21,263 1,326 23,970 5,672 790,765 4,906,235 5,887,649

Table 4.11: 2011 Base aggregated matrix



E

lmbr

idge

Eps

om &

E

wel

l

Gui

ldfo

rd

Mol

e V

alle

y

Rei

gate

&

Ban

stea

d

Run

nym

ede

Spe

lthor

ne

Sur

rey

Hea

th

Tand

ridge

Wav

erle

y

Wok

ing

Rus

hmoo

r &

Har

t

Bor

don

Hor

sham

&

Cra

wle

y

E.G

rinst

ead

& H

.Hea

th

Lond

on

Res

t of

Brit

ain

Tota

l

Elmbridge 9,617 25 446 383 11 822 350 2 2 271 289 12 0 59 0 1,331 479 14,099

Epsom & Ewell 86 3,895 27 676 664 16 114 1 1 123 18 13 0 24 0 2,637 238 8,534

Guildford 230 8 12,234 428 235 47 58 163 50 2,066 1,215 777 8 6 32 2,121 1,737 21,414

Mole Valley 405 434 484 6,923 459 3 4 3 6 189 32 14 0 203 1 309 857 10,322

Reigate & Banstead 4 649 493 440 8,351 29 27 155 629 91 231 122 0 920 2 1,876 943 14,963

Runnymede 438 2 108 8 108 5,734 692 314 2 116 744 22 0 50 0 135 1,073 9,549

Spelthorne 363 28 87 3 67 1,682 5,847 9 1 12 92 4 0 18 0 2,030 914 11,156

Surrey Heath 3 1 258 7 35 200 10 5,042 86 49 406 815 3 28 0 149 831 7,921

Tandridge 5 5 159 19 751 1 2 138 5,671 36 51 10 0 242 278 1,346 1,182 9,896

Waverley 154 42 2,542 106 15 6 7 22 10 6,530 275 350 408 1 0 922 1,986 13,376

Woking 167 1 1,891 5 86 678 19 272 15 372 5,182 146 6 69 0 401 743 10,052

Rushmoor & Hart 12 14 427 22 30 52 38 600 5 644 103 12,117 44 0 0 1,300 4,922 20,328

Bordon 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 1 0 281 0 0 5 888 1,581

Horsham & Crawley 24 41 41 1,051 1,116 16 21 2 250 89 69 7 0 8,266 90 835 8,630 20,548


London 2,363 3,969 1,385 409 2,320 676 3,357 110 2,248 364 777 340 17 2,008 4 631,900 49,476 701,723

Rest of Britain 851 176 1,059 548 807 1,325 1,480 1,477 1,792 2,661 548 6,529 559 11,969 4,898 180,945 5,322,541 5,540,166

Total 14,724 9,290 21,686 11,033 15,065 11,287 12,028 8,311 11,078 14,013 10,035 21,278 1,327 23,984 5,675 828,252 5,401,148 6,420,217

Table 4.12: 2026 Do-Nothing aggregated matrix



E

lmbr

idge

Eps

om &

E

wel

l

Gui

ldfo

rd

Mol

e V

alle

y

Rei

gate

&

Ban

stea

d

Run

nym

ede

Spe

lthor

ne

Sur

rey

Hea

th

Tand

ridge

Wav

erle

y

Wok

ing

Rus

hmoo

r &

Har

t

Bor

don

Hor

sham

&

Cra

wle

y

E.G

rinst

ead

& H

.Hea

th

Lond

on

Res

t of

Brit

ain

Tota

l

Elmbridge 10,050 26 462 399 11 871 367 3 2 283 304 13 0 61 0 1,359 505 14,716

Epsom & Ewell 91 4,292 29 736 727 17 122 1 2 129 18 14 0 26 0 2,851 254 9,309

Guildford 243 8 12,942 460 249 49 61 173 52 2,181 1,270 850 8 7 32 2,221 1,825 22,631

Mole Valley 434 458 503 7,318 476 3 4 3 6 196 34 15 0 211 1 325 898 10,884

Reigate & Banstead 5 735 601 508 9,772 35 31 164 726 106 267 138 0 1,162 2 2,072 1,087 17,410

Runnymede 464 2 110 9 113 6,570 703 352 3 117 767 23 0 66 0 145 1,107 10,550

Spelthorne 387 30 92 3 71 1,812 6,293 10 1 12 97 4 0 20 0 2,158 972 11,960

Surrey Heath 3 1 275 7 39 209 13 5,467 97 57 424 930 3 31 0 165 888 8,608

Tandridge 5 6 164 20 786 2 2 145 6,022 37 54 11 0 251 286 1,426 1,243 10,461

Waverley 159 45 2,658 107 16 7 7 23 11 6,921 289 369 438 2 0 951 2,092 14,094

Woking 182 1 2,111 5 88 819 20 292 19 403 5,933 153 6 69 0 420 793 11,315

Rushmoor & Hart 12 14 485 22 30 53 42 632 5 729 117 14,000 49 0 0 1,409 5,195 22,792

Bordon 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 418 1 0 293 0 0 5 927 1,650

Horsham & Crawley 26 45 44 1,156 1,219 17 23 2 284 101 74 7 0 9,193 101 878 9,723 22,894


London 2,363 3,969 1,385 409 2,320 676 3,357 110 2,248 364 777 340 17 2,008 4 631,900 49,476 701,723

Rest of Britain 851 176 1,059 548 808 1,325 1,480 1,477 1,792 2,661 548 6,529 559 11,971 4,898 180,947 5,322,540 5,540,170

Total 15,277 9,809 22,969 11,715 16,737 12,464 12,525 8,853 11,616 14,715 10,978 23,396 1,374 25,195 5,728 829,242 5,403,206 6,435,800

Table 4.13: 2026 Do-Something aggregated matrix



Scenario

Surrey Intra

County Trips

Absolute Difference from 2011

% Difference from 2011

External to County Trips



County to External

Trips



Matrix total



2011 102,436 35,982 28,833 5,887,649 2026 Do-Nothing 102,399 -37 0.0% 36,213 231 0.6% 28,942 109 0.4% 6,420,217 532,568 9.0% 2026 Do-Something 110,978 8,542 8.3% 36,680 698 1.9% 30,960 2,127 7.4% 6,435,800 548,151 9.3%

Table 4.14: Matrix summaries



5 MODELLING RESULTS

5.1 Summary Network Statistics

5.1.1 Tables 5.1 and 5.2 present the network based summary statistics for all modelled vehicles and links within Surrey. The summary statistics compare the key outputs from the modelling of the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and the 2026 Do-Something. The network statistics are disaggregated into road types.

5.1.2 Table 5.1 shows the amount and proportional breakdown of links modelled within the Surrey.

Road Type No. of Links

Road Length (Kms)

% of Road

Length (Kms)

Motorway 223 284 7.4% Trunk A road 184 144 3.7% Principal A road 1,892 1,217 31.6% B road 989 823 21.4% Other road 1,520 1,384 35.9% Total 4,808 3,851 100% Table 5.1: Modelled links in Surrey

Surrey Network Totals Absolute Difference Percentage Difference

Statistic Road Type 2011 2026 Do-

Nothing2026 Do-

Something

2026 Do-Nothing

less 2011

2026 Do-Something less 2026

Do-Nothing

2026 Do-Nothing

less 2011

2026 Do-Something less 2026

Do-Nothing

Motorway 1,192,870 1,200,803 1,215,903 7,933 15,100 0.7% 1.3% Trunk A road 332,312 334,230 337,107 1,918 2,877 0.6% 0.9% Principal A road 971,362 976,336 1,005,283 4,974 28,947 0.5% 3.0% B road 445,914 451,490 465,251 5,576 13,761 1.3% 3.0% Other road 545,419 550,692 572,904 5,273 22,212 1.0% 4.0%

Vehicle Kilometres (veh kms)

Total 3,487,877 3,513,551 3,596,448 25,674 82,897 0.7% 2.4% Motorway 18,747 19,223 19,861 476 638 2.5% 3.3% Trunk A road 5,145 5,226 5,329 81 103 1.6% 2.0% Principal A road 21,123 21,314 22,192 191 878 0.9% 4.1% B road 10,721 10,847 11,380 126 533 1.2% 4.9% Other road 11,824 11,956 12,590 132 634 1.1% 5.3%

Vehicle Hours (veh

hrs)

Total 67,560 68,566 71,352 1,006 2,786 1.5% 4.1% Motorway 63.6 62.5 61.2 -1.10 -1.30 -1.7% -2.1% Trunk A road 64.6 64.0 63.3 -0.60 -0.70 -0.9% -1.1% Principal A road 46.0 45.8 45.3 -0.20 -0.50 -0.4% -1.1% B road 41.6 41.6 40.9 0.00 -0.70 0.0% -1.7% Other road 46.1 46.1 45.5 0.00 -0.60 0.0% -1.3%

Average Speed (kph)

Average 52.4 52.0 51.2 -0.38 -0.76 -0.7% -1.5% Table 5.2: Surrey summary statistics



5.1.3 In summary Table 5.2 indicates that the County as a whole experiences relatively minor increases in the key transport statistics in all modelled scenarios, when compared to their references (2011 base acts as a reference for the 2026 Do-Nothing and the 2026 Do-Nothing is a reference for the 2026 Do-Something).

5.1.4 Secondly all road types experience an increase in vehicle kilometres and vehicle hours between the scenarios and the references. A decrease in average speed is a direct result of increased vehicle kilometres, which is apparent in all modelled variants when compared to their relevant reference case.

5.1.5 No additional trips are added to the study area within the 2026 Do-Nothing, so increases in summary statistics in the 2026 Do-Nothing are the impacts felt in Surrey as a result of residual growth in Great Britain in 2026.

5.1.6 The vehicle kilometres travelled within Surrey increases by 0.7% in the 2026 Do-Nothing when compared to the 2011 base. In the 2026 Do-Something vehicle kilometres increases by 2.4% when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing. The amount of vehicle hours is the statistic that has the largest increase (4.1%) in the 2026 Do-Something when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing. The average speed of all links in Surrey is 52.4 kph (2011 base), 52.0 kph (2026 Do-Nothing) and 51.2 kph (2026 Do-Something), relating to a 0.7% and 1.5% reduction in the 2026 Do-Nothing and Do-Something.

5.1.7 The road type that has the largest amount of vehicle kilometres travelled (in the County) for all modelled scenarios is the motorway category. The motorways continue to incur the largest absolute increase in vehicle kilometres in the 2026 Do-Nothing, with an absolute increase of 7,933 veh kms relating to a 0.7% increase (compared to the 2011 base). However, the Principal A road category is also likely to experience the largest increase in vehicle kilometres in the 2026 Do-Something, an increase of 28,947 veh kms relating to a 3% increase (compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing). An explanation for this is that in the 2026 Do-Nothing only trips external to the study area were being growthed to 2026, and as such vehicle kilometres on the motorway links in Surrey incur the largest increase as a result of trips travelling through the County on long distance travel by use of the SRN. In the 2026 Do-Something only additional trips were added to Surrey and local external developments, as a result vehicle kilometres have increased most on principal roads, suggesting increased flow on the LRN around the County to reach a destination internal or external to the County.

5.1.8 The Principal A road category also experiences the largest absolute increase in vehicle hours in the 2026 Do-Something (when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing), with an absolute increase of 878 veh hrs relating to a 4.1% increase. Trunk roads experience the smallest absolute increase in vehicle hours in the 2026 Do-Something when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing (absolute increase of 103 veh hrs relating to a 2% increase). Table 5.1 highlights that the road type that covers the smallest amount of distance is the Trunk A road (144 km).

5.1.9 In the 2026 Do-Nothing scenario the road type to experience the largest absolute reduction in average speed is the motorway category (absolute decrease of 1.1 kph relating to a 2.1% reduction), thus correlating with the motorways also incurring the largest increase in vehicle kilometres and vehicle hours in the 2026 Do-Nothing (compared to the 2011 Base). This therefore relates to the trip ends external to the study area using the motorways most to travel through the County, relating to long distance travel. In the 2026 Do-Something the motorways, B roads and Other roads experience the largest absolute decreases in average speed, reduction of 2.1%, 1.7% and 1.3% respectively.



5.2 Strategic Route Network Journey Times

5.2.1 Tables 5.3 to 5.6 show the average speeds and journey times estimated to be experienced on all the major sections of the SRN in the County for all modelled vehicles. The sections of the SRN that journey times have been calculated for are: • M25 junction 5 – 14 (clockwise and anti-clockwise) • M23 junction 7 – 10 (northbound and southbound) • M3 junction 1 – 4 (northbound and southbound) • A3 Hindhead – Tolworth (northbound and southbound)



Average Speed (Kph)

Differences Average Speed

(Kph) - Absolute Differences

Average Speed (Kph) - Percentage

Differences Journey Time (Mins: Secs)

Journey Time (Mins: Secs) -

Absolute Differences

Journey Time (Mins, Secs) - Percentage Differences Junction

Junction Length (Km)

2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN

less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN J5 - 6 16 48.1 45.2 46.9 -3.0 1.7 -6.2% 3.9% 19:22 20:39 19:53 1:17 -0:46 6.6% -3.7% J6 - 7 5 86.3 86.1 86.1 -0.3 0.0 -0.3% 0.0% 3:11 3:12 3:12 0:01 0:00 0.4% -0.1% J7 - 8 6 76.2 78.0 74.9 1.8 -3.1 2.3% -4.0% 5:21 5:17 5:25 -0:04 0:08 -1.1% 2.5% J8 - 9 11 61.2 60.7 58.7 -0.6 -2.0 -0.9% -3.3% 12:20 12:28 13:1 0:08 0:33 1.2% 4.4% J9 - 10 10 56.0 54.2 51.4 -1.8 -2.8 -3.2% -5.2% 10:39 11:00 11:36 0:21 0:36 3.3% 5.4% J10 - 11 8 65.2 62.6 59.8 -2.5 -2.8 -3.9% -4.5% 7:37 7:57 8:21 0:20 0:24 4.4% 5.1% J11 - 12 4 67.3 67.8 62.0 0.5 -5.8 0.8% -8.6% 3:16 3:14 3:32 -0:02 0:18 -0.9% 9.3% J12 - 13 5 85.0 81.9 81.0 -3.1 -0.9 -3.6% -1.1% 3:40 3:49 3:51 0:09 0:02 4.4% 0.8% J13 - 14 4 71.6 71.0 70.4 -0.5 -0.6 -0.8% -0.9% 4, 12 4:17 4:24 0:05 0:07 2.1% 2.5% J5 - 14 69 68.5 67.5 65.7 -1.1 -1.8 -1.5% -2.7% 69:37 71:54 73:15 2:17 1:21 3.3% 1.9% J14 - 13 3 102.8 102.9 103.1 0.1 0.2 0.1% 0.2% 1:56 1:56 1:56 0:00 0:00 0.0% -0.2% J13 - 12 5 105.0 104.9 104.6 -0.1 -0.3 -0.1% -0.3% 2:54 2:54 2:54 0:00 0:01 0.1% 0.4% J12 - 11 4 95.9 95.7 94.5 -0.3 -1.2 -0.3% -1.3% 2:26 2:26 2:28 0:01 0:02 0.4% 1.5% J11 - 10 8 86.8 86.2 85.8 -0.7 -0.3 -0.8% -0.4% 5:37 5:40 5:41 0:03 0:01 0.8% 0.4% J10 - 9 10 83.9 81.6 82.2 -2.4 0.6 -2.8% 0.7% 7:25 7:39 7:35 0:14 -0:04 3.1% -0.8% J9 - 8 11 84.9 83.7 83.3 -1.3 -0.3 -1.5% -0.4% 8:10 8:08 8:10 0:07 0:02 1.5% 0.4% J8 - 7 6 86.4 85.7 81.6 -0.7 -4.1 -0.9% -4.8% 3:51 3:53 4:06 0:02 0:13 0.9% 5.4% J7 - 6 5 84.7 81.1 81.5 -3.7 0.4 -4.3% 0.5% 3:25 3:32 3:31 0:07 0:00 3.3% -0.2% J6 - 5 16 67.1 63.6 62.5 -3.4 -1.1 -5.1% -1.8% 17:16 18:47 19:19 1:31 0:32 8.8% 2.8% J14 - 5 69 88.6 87.2 86.6 -1.4 -0.7 -1.6% -0.8% 52:51 54:55 55:42 2:04 0:46 3.9% 1.4% Table 5.3: Journey times for the M25 junctions 4 – 15 (clockwise and anit-clockwise)



Average Speed (Kph)




Differences Journey Time (Mins:Secs)

Journey Time (Mins:Secs) -




2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN

less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN J7 - 8 3 104.6 104.4 104.3 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1% -0.2% 1:34 1:34 1:34 0:00 0:00 0.1% 0.1% J8 - 9 15 102.7 102.6 102.4 -0.0 -0.2 0.0% -0.2% 8:49 8:50 8:51 0:00 0:01 0.1% 0.2% J9 - 10 3 104.3 104.2 104.0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1% -0.2% 1:45 1:45 1:45 0:00 0:00 0.1% 0.2% J7 - 10 21 103.9 103.8 103.6 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1% -0.2% 12:08 12:08 12:10 0:01 0:02 0.1% 0.2% J10 - 9 3 105.3 105.5 105.2 0.2 -0.4 0.2% -0.3% 1:48 1:48 1:48 0:00 0:00 -0.2% 0.4% J9 - 8 10 103.9 104.3 104.0 0.4 -0.3 0.4% -0.3% 5:59 5:57 5:58 -0:02 0:01 -0.4% 0.3% J8 - 7 4 103.3 103.5 103.5 0.2 -0.0 0.2% 0.0% 2:18 2:18 2:18 0:00 0:00 -0.2% 0.0% J10 - 7 17 104.2 104.4 104.2 0.3 -0.2 0.2% -0.2% 10:05 10:03 10:04 -0:02 0:01 -0.3% 0.2% Table 5.4: Journey times for the M23 junctions 7 – 10 (northbound and southbound)

Average Speed (Kph)









2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN

less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN J1 - 2 10 103.6 103.5 103.5 -0.0 -0.1 0.0% -0.1% 5:36 5:37 5:37 0:00 0:00 0.0% 0.1% J2 - 3 12 104.8 104.6 104.5 -0.2 -0.0 -0.2% 0.0% 6:55 6:55 6:55 0:01 0:00 0.2% 0.0% J3 - 4 8 105.8 105.7 105.7 -0.1 0.0 -0.1% 0.0% 4:21 4:22 4:21 0:00 0:00 0.1% 0.0% J1 - 4 29 104.7 104.6 104.6 -0.1 -0.0 -0.1% 0.0% 16:52 16:53 16:54 0:01 0:00 0.1% 0.0% J4 - 3 7 35.4 35.5 34.1 0.1 -1.4 0.3% -4.1% 11:38 11:41 12:08 0:02 0:28 0.3% 4.0% J3 - 2 12 38.8 39.6 38.5 0.8 -1.0 2.0% -2.6% 23:40 23:8 24:09 -0:32 1:01 -2.3% 4.4% J2 - 1 11 89.0 89.2 88.4 0.1 -0.7 0.1% -0.8% 7:36 7:35 7:39 -0:01 0:04 -0.2% 0.8% J4 - 1 30 54.4 54.8 53.7 0.3 -1.1 0.6% -2.0% 42:54 42:23 43:56 -0:31 1:32 -1.2% 3.6% Table 5.5: Journey times for the M3 junctions 1 – 4 (northbound and southbound)



Average Speed (Kph)








Junction

Length (Km) 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN

less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2026 DN

less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN Hindhead - Guildford (Dennis Roundabout)

21 65.9 65.3 65.4 -0.6 0.1 -1.0% 0.2% 20:45 20:59 20:58 0:13 0:00 1.1% 0.0%

Guildford (Dennis Roundabout) - M25 (Wisley Interchange)

14 78.2 77.2 76.2 -1.1 -0.9 -1.4% -1.2% 10:05 10:16 10:25 0:10 0:10 1.7% 1.6%

M25 (Wisley Interchange) - Tolworth

15 70.5 70.4 69.0 -0.1 -1.4 -0.1% -2.0% 14:04 14:5 14:33 0:01 0:27 0.1% 3.2%

Hindhead - Tolworth 50 71.5 70.9 70.2 -0.6 -0.7 -0.8% -1.1% 44:54 45:19 45:56 0:25 0:36 0.9% 1.3%

Tolworth - M25 (Wisley Interchange)

14 76.2 76.4 76.1 0.1 -0.3 0.2% -0.3% 11:52 11:50 11:54 -0:02 0:05 -0.2% 0.6%

M25 (Wisley Interchange - Guildford (Dennis Roundabout)

15 93.9 94.0 93.5 0.1 -0.5 0.1% -0.5% 9:15 9:15 9:17 -0:01 0:03 -0.1% 0.5%

Guildford (Dennis Roundabout) - Hindhead

21 75.8 75.9 75.7 0.1 -0.2 0.1% -0.2% 16:35 16:32 16:38 -0:03 0:06 -0.3% 0.6%

Tolworth - Hindhead 50 82.0 82.1 81.8 0.1 -0.3 0.1% -0.4% 37:42 37:37 37:50 -0:05 0:13 -0.2% 0.6%

Table 5.6: Journey times for the A3 Hindhead – Tolworth (northbound and southbound)



5.2.2 The flow, average speed and journey time of a link are all related. For example a general trend/correlation occurs between the three elements: when flow increases, average speed decreases and a result of this is increased journey time.

5.2.3 Tables 5.3 to 5.6 indicate that the future development projected to occur in the forecast year of 2026 has a minor affect on the SRN within Surrey. For example, the largest overall absolute increase in journey time estimated to occur in the 2026 Do-Something is on the northbound stretch of the M3 (between junctions 4 and 1), with an increase of 1 minute 32 seconds (3.6% increase) when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing.

5.2.4 Table 5.3 indicates that the M25 junction 5 to 14 (clockwise) has a longer journey time in all modelled variants than junctions 14 to 5 (anti-clockwise). For example, it is estimated that the journey time between junctions 5 and 14 in the average AM peak hour in 2026 Do-Something is 73 minutes 15 seconds, whereas the journey time between junctions 14 and 5 is estimated to be 55 minutes 42 seconds. Therefore a difference of 17 minutes 33 seconds occurs in the 2026 Do-Something based on direction of travel on the whole section of the M25 in Surrey. Table 5.3 also suggests that the largest absolute increases in journey time between individual junctions in the 2026 Do-Something (when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing), is present between junctions 9 and 10 (36 second increase relating to a 5.4% increase) and junctions 8 and 9 (33 second increase relating to 4.4% increase).

5.2.5 The additional trips generated from forecast development, in all modelled scenarios, is not likely to affect the M23 between junctions 7 and 10 (in a northbound and southbound direction). Table 5.4 indicates that the average speeds, and therefore the journey times too, remain virtually constant for this part of the SRN.

5.2.6 Average speeds and journey times for the M3 in Surrey (junctions 1 to 4) are presented in Table 5.5. The southbound stretch of the M3 between junctions 1 and 4 does not incur any relevant changes in average speed or journey times in the modelled scenarios. However, the northbound stretch, between junction 4 and 1 is subject to an increase in journey time of 1 minute 32 seconds (a 3.6% increase) in the 2026 Do-Something, compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing, as such it also incurs the lowest average speeds. Specifically junctions 3 to 2 are expected to incur the largest absolute increase in journey time in the 2026 Do-Something, 1 minute 1 second (a 4.4% increase), when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing.

5.2.7 Table 5.6 indicates that the entire Surrey stretch of the A3 has a higher journey time in the 2026 Do-Something in a northbound direction, 45 minutes 56 seconds, when compared to the southbound direction, 37 minutes 50 seconds. A difference of 8 minutes 6 seconds based on the direction of travel in the 2026 Do-Something. When examining journey times for general sections of the A3, the northbound section between the M25 Wisley Interchange and Tolworth junction has the largest individual absolute increase (27 seconds relating to a 3.2% increase) in journey time in the 2026 Do-Something in comparison to the 2026 Do-Nothing.



5.3 Cost of Congestion compared to Volume/Capacity Ratio

5.3.1 SCC has created a cost of congestion map for the County for 2007/08. The map utilises free flow travel times, congested travel times, modelled flows and the application of a monetary value for different vehicle types. The cost of congestion is plotted on a map of Surrey to highlight the roads in the County that have the highest costs of congestion due to changes in free flow and congested travel times.

5.3.2 The values of time for each vehicle type (Car, LGV and HGV) were sourced from WebTAG (TAG Unit 3.5.6 Table 9). The modelled flows were sourced from the County model (SINTRAM), and the observed travel times were sourced from the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Congestion Journey Time and Acquisition Monitoring System (CJAMS). The formula used to calculate the cost of congestion for each link is shown below in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.1: Total Cost of Congestion equation

5.3.3 Figure 5.2 shows the latest cost of congestion map, (2007/08), displaying the two highest cost bands only: between 100 and 200 GBP and over 200 GBP.

5.3.4 It is possible to visually compare the 2007/08 cost of congestion map with the modelled flows and volume/capacity ratios (VCR) for the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Something scenarios. This will aid the identification of areas of highest congestion, in terms of cost, in 2007/08 and whether the trends continue into the modelled 2011 base and forecast year of 2026 (with all committed and non-committed planned development in Surrey being modelled).

5.3.5 Both the volume of traffic and level of congestion projected to occur in the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Something are represented using a coloured bandwidth plot on the modelled road network. The volume/capacity ratios (VCR) are shown only for links within the study area with a VCR equal to or greater than 1, in Figures 5.3 and 5.4.

5.3.6 The cost of congestion map shown in Figure 5.2 indicates roads in the County that have the highest cost of congestion based on 2007/08 modelled flows and observed journey times, by highlighting the roads in red (indicating a cost greater than 200 GBP). The key parts of the SRN with such costs are:

• M3 junctions 4 to 3;

( )jtjt

jtijtijt

jti

iCVCVVOTTCC ∑∑∑ −=

Where: TCC = Total Cost of Congestion Vijt = flow of user class i on link j during time of day period t Cijt = travel time of user class i on link j during time of day period t Cj0 = free-flow travel time on link j (generally observed during the off-peak period) VOTi = value of time for user class i (obtained from the DfT’s Highway Economic Note)



• Majority of the M25 between junctions 13 and 8 as well as junctions 6 and 5 (clockwise and anti-clockwise);

• A3 approaching the M25 junction 10 Wisley Interchange (from north and south of the M25);

• A3 surrounding Guildford (specifically near Dennis roundabout).

5.3.7 In relation to the LRN, the main areas/corridors shown by the 2007/08 cost of congestion map appear to be: • A31 between Farnham and Guildford; • A245 near the Painshill junction; • A320 St Peter’s Way (as well as other local roads surrounding the M25

junction 11).

5.3.8 Figures 5.3 and 5.4 display the VCR bandwidths for all links in the study area that have a VCR value equal to or greater than 1, for the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Something forecast. The widths of the bands displayed on the modelled links are proportionate to the projected flow. The colour of the bands relate to the VCR value, for example, links coloured orange have a VCR value ranging from 1 to 1.59. A value of 1 was chosen as it is likely that when a VCR value between 0.85 and 1 is reached it is likely that the flow conditions will decrease thus increasing the likelihood of flow breakdown, congestion and increased journey times. Therefore a VCR value of 1 relates to more certainty of congestion than 0.85.

5.3.9 Figure 5.3 indicates that the links with the highest VCR values (indicated by dark red bands) in the 2011 base are generally located external to Surrey, such as: • A24 (travelling northbound and into the County) near Horsham; • A23 (travelling northbound and into the County) near Crawley; • A22 (travelling northbound and into the County) at Haywards Heath.

5.3.10 The areas of the SRN that incur largest corridors of congestion in 2011 are: • M3 junctions 4a to 2 (northbound); • M25 junctions 13 to 14 (clockwise); • A3 between A31 and Dennis Roundabout (northbound); • A3 at the Hook junction (northbound and southbound).

5.3.11 With reference to the LRN the main areas of congestion in the 2011 base are: • A31 approaching Farnham (from the south but travelling northbound); • A245 Portsmouth Rd (either side of the Painshill junction).

5.3.12 Figure 5.4 displays VCR bandwidths for the 2026 Do-Something. The VCR bandwidths that have a value equal to or greater than 1 appear to be relatively similar to the 2011 base. This infers that there are not any new, large, areas of congestion projected to occur in 2026 as a result of the committed and non-committed planned future development. However, one area of increased congestion in 2026 (but actually occurs in the 2026 Do-Nothing – compare Figures 5.5 and 5.6 in section 5.4) is apparent on the A3 (travelling northbound) between the Ripley junction and the M25 junction 10 Wisley Interchange.

5.3.13 In relation to comparisons between the cost of congestion map for 2007/08 and the VCR bandwidths for the modelled base year of 2011 and 2026 Do-Something, it appears that similar areas of congestion are being represented. Figures 5.2 (2007/08 cost of congestion map) to 5.4 (2026 Do-Something VCR plot) all highlight the following roads to have high monetary costs and values of congestion:



• M3 junctions 3 to 4 (northbound); • M25 junctions 13 to 14 (clockwise); • A245 Portsmouth Rd (west of the A3 Painshill junction); • A31 Alton Rd (northbound) (approaching and through Farnham) • A3 Portsmouth Rd (northbound) (between Ripley junction and M25 junction

10 Wisley Interchange)

5.3.14 Roads that are presented in Figures 5.2 to 5.4 as having high costs of congestion and VCR values over 1, are areas currently thought to be congested (based on observed journey times) and are thought to continue to have high levels of congestion until the forecast year of 2026 (based on modelled flows).



Figure 5.2: 2007/08 Cost of Congestion map for Surrey



Figure 5.3: 2011 base traffic volumes and VCR (VCR values greater than 1 displayed only).

Key VCR 1.00 – 1.59 VCR 1.60 – 1.65 VCR 1.66 +

N

Scale 3,500 vph



Figure 5.4: 2026 Do-Something traffic volumes and VCR (VCR values greater than 1 displayed only)

N

Scale 3,500 vph

Key VCR 1.00 – 1.59 VCR 1.60 – 1.65 VCR 1.66 +



5.4 Volume/Capacity Ratio

5.4.1 Figures 5.5 to 5.7 display the estimated flows and VCRs for all modelled links in the study area. VCR bandwidths are only displayed for links with a VCR equal to or greater than 0.85.

5.4.2 Figure 5.5 displays the projected flows and VCR for the 2011 base. A visual interpretation indicates that the main areas of the County projected to incur some of the highest levels of flow and congestion in the 2011 base are: • A3 Portsmouth Rd, Hindhead - travelling northbound prior to the Hindhead

crossroads; • A31 Farnham Rd, Guildford – travelling eastbound prior to the Guildford

gyratory; • A245 Portsmouth Rd, Painshill – travelling westbound after the A3 Painshill

junction; • M3 J4a to 2 (M25 J12 Thorpe Interchange) – travelling northbound; • A3 Guildford By-pass – travelling northbound between junctions with the

A31 and Dennis roundabout; • A31 Alton Road, Farnham – travelling eastbound approaching the

Coxbridge roundabout; • M25 junctions 13 to 14 – travelling clockwise.

5.4.3 Figure 5.5 also indicates that areas outside of the County are estimated to incur relatively significant levels of congestion, specifically Horsham, Crawley and East Grinstead. However, an element of caution should be used when analysing areas external to the County as the level of network coding is not as precise due to these areas being outside of the models main area of purpose.

5.4.4 Figure 5.6 displays volumes of traffic and congestion in the 2026 Do-Nothing. The 2026 Do-Nothing represents relatively similar bandwidths as the 2011 base for the LRN. This relates to no development occurring in the study area but the rest of the Country growthed to 2026 forecasts. However, small differences can be seen on the SRN when comparing the 2026 Do-Nothing to the 2011 base. For example the VCR values have changed from the ranges of 0.91 - 0.95 to 0.96 –0.99 on the M25 between junctions 5 and 6 (clockwise and anti-clockwise). Areas external to the County that incur an increase in VCR in the 2026 Do-Nothing (when compared to the 2011 base) is the B2026 Balcombe Road travelling northbound (into the County) from the south near Horsham and the A23 London Road travelling northbound (into the County) from the south (Crawley).

5.4.5 Visual observations of the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something VCR plots indicate that there are no significant increases in congestion between the two scenarios. However, an area of the SRN projected to experience an increase in flow and therefore congestion, is the M25 between junctions 9 and 8 (anti-clockwise) with an increased VCR value of over 0.85. Increases in congestion are also projected on the LRN in the 2026 Do-Something. The most noticeable being the A31 Hogs Back (eastbound) increasing from a value range between 0.91 and 0.95 to 0.96 and 0.99. The A331 Blackwater Valley Route (BVR) northbound incurs increased congestion as a larger stretch has a VCR value over 0.85 in the 2026 Do-Something. These roads are not part of the SRN but form key routes in an east to west and north to south direction through the County.



Figure 5.5: 2011 base traffic volumes and VCR

N Key VCR 0.85 – 0.90 VCR 0.91 – 0.95 VCR 0.96 – 0.99 VCR 1.00 – 1.59 VCR 1.60 – 1.65 VCR 1.66 +

Scale 3,500 vph



Figure 5.6: 2026 Do-Nothing traffic volumes and VCR

N Key VCR 0.85 – 0.90 VCR 0.91 – 0.95 VCR 0.96 – 0.99 VCR 1.00 – 1.59 VCR 1.60 – 1.65 VCR 1.66 +

Scale 3,500 vph



Figure 5.7: 2026 Do-Something traffic volumes and VCR

N

Scale 3,500 vph

Key VCR 0.85 – 0.90 VCR 0.91 – 0.95 VCR 0.96 – 0.99 VCR 1.00 – 1.59 VCR 1.60 – 1.65 VCR 1.66 +



5.4.6 All modelled links within the County were ranked based on the differences between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something based on three criteria: absolute difference in flow; percentage difference in flow and differences in VCR. Each of these three criteria have been ranked separately and then summed to provide an overall un-weighted score which has then been ranked (i.e. the lowest score equals the highest ranked link) to define the links likely to experience the greatest negative impacts in terms of increases in flows and congestion. Table 5.7 shows a borough/district proportional breakdown of links within the County that are ranked within the top 25%, 10% and top 100 of all links.

Total no. of links

% of total no. of links

No. of links in

top 25 % of total links

% of top 25% of total links

No. of links in top 10% of total links

% of top 10% of total links

No. of links in top 100

links

% of top 100 links

Elmbridge 347 7% 38 3% 17 4% 0 0% Epsom & Ewell 228 5% 54 5% 22 5% 5 5% Guildford 884 19% 207 18% 57 12% 8 8% Mole Valley 492 10% 152 13% 53 11% 6 6% Reigate & Banstead 526 11% 195 17% 85 18% 20 20% Runnymede 285 6% 80 7% 55 12% 21 21% Spelthorne 344 7% 70 6% 21 4% 10 10% Surrey Heath 332 7% 88 7% 46 10% 11 11% Tandridge 320 7% 41 3% 10 2% 0 0% Waverley 507 11% 92 8% 24 5% 3 3% Woking 438 9% 158 13% 80 17% 16 16% Total 4703 100% 1175 100% 470 100% 100 100% Table 5.7: Borough/district breakdown of links based on flow and VCR ranking (based on differences between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something).

5.4.7 Table 5.7 indicates that the borough of Guildford contains the largest proportion of modelled links within the County, 19% of all modelled links. The borough of Guildford also contains the largest proportion of links ranked in the top 25%, whereas the borough of Reigate & Banstead contains the largest proportion of links in the top10% and the borough of Runnymede contains the largest proportion of links in the top 100 links, to incur the largest increases in flow and VCR values between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something.

5.4.8 Table 5.8 shows the top twenty links in the County that are forecast to rank highest in terms of increases in flow and VCR. Therefore the links displayed in Table 5.8 are not the links in the County with the highest VCR values, but are the links that are forecast to incur the largest increases (in flow and VCR values) between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something as a result of the future trip generation generated from non-committed development.

5.4.9 Figures 5.8 and 5.9 display the geographic locations of the links shown in Table 5.8.



Flow (All Vehicles) VCR Abs Diff in Flow

% Diff in Flow

Abs Diff in VCR

Ranking based on 2026 DS less 2026 DN

Link No.

Link Dir Road District Capacity

2011 2026 DN

2026 DS 2011 2026

DN 2026 DS

2026 DS less

2026 DN

2026 DS less

2026 DN

2026 DS less

2026 DN

Abs Diff in

VCR

% Diff in

Flow

Abs Diff in Flow

Score Position

10685 1 (S) A245 Old Woking Rd Woking 1,200 689 670 1,010 0.57 0.56 0.84 340 51% 0.28 2 23 6 31 1 15684 2 (E) Horley Road Reigate & Banstead 800 620 633 896 0.77 0.79 1.12 262 41% 0.33 1 37 16 54 2 16870 1 (E) Trumps Green Rd Runnymede 1,200 761 781 1,092 0.63 0.65 0.91 311 40% 0.26 5 45 10 60 3 10688 1 (S) A245 Old Woking Rd Woking 1,200 661 681 957 0.55 0.57 0.80 276 41% 0.23 6 44 13 63 4 15685 2 (W) Horley Rd Reigate & Banstead 800 531 546 757 0.66 0.68 0.95 211 39% 0.26 3 50 30 83 5 16392 1 (N) Stroude Rd Runnymede 1,700 268 278 502 0.16 0.16 0.30 224 81% 0.13 53 6 26 85 6 16749 2 (E) Chobham Ln Runnymede 1,200 697 718 979 0.58 0.60 0.82 261 36% 0.22 8 66 17 91 7 15699 2 (N) Chertsey Rd Woking 800 247 246 397 0.31 0.31 0.50 151 61% 0.19 13 15 69 97 8 8868 2 (W) Mill Ln Reigate & Banstead 800 323 345 504 0.40 0.43 0.63 159 46% 0.20 11 29 61 101 9 16673 1 (S) Short Ln Spelthorne 1,200 412 494 672 0.34 0.41 0.56 178 36% 0.15 29 71 40 140 10 15111 1 (W) B382 Woking Rd Woking 1,700 461 452 647 0.27 0.27 0.38 195 43% 0.11 76 36 33 145 11 8814 2 (N) A242 Croydon Rd Reigate & Banstead 800 396 391 535 0.49 0.49 0.67 145 37% 0.18 14 60 72 146 12 9335 1 (S) Long Ln Spelthorne 1,200 434 506 682 0.36 0.42 0.57 176 35% 0.15 31 75 43 149 13 16861 2 (E) B3407 High St Runnymede 800 513 397 539 0.64 0.50 0.67 142 36% 0.18 16 72 76 164 14 15112 2 (W) B382 Woking Rd Woking 1,700 499 497 687 0.29 0.29 0.40 190 38% 0.11 85 52 35 172 15 8458 1 (W) B3367 Monkton Ln Waverley 800 228 104 217 0.29 0.13 0.27 113 109% 0.14 35 3 143 181 16 16753 2 (E) B386 Holloway Hill Runnymede 1,700 1,843 1,848 2,290 1.08 1.09 1.35 442 24% 0.26 4 177 1 182 17 15914 1 (E) Green Lane Runnymede 1,200 975 914 1,146 0.81 0.76 0.95 232 25% 0.19 12 153 24 189 18 16769 2 (E) Norlands Lane Spelthorne 1,700 197 221 384 0.12 0.13 0.23 163 74% 0.10 130 9 55 194 19 16474 2 (S) Pooley Green Rd Runnymede 1,200 324 233 367 0.27 0.19 0.31 134 57% 0.11 87 20 93 200 20 Table 5.8: Top 20 links in Surrey likely to incur largest increases in flow and VCR between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something

Values highlighted in green have a VCR value ranging between 0.85 and 1. Values highlighted in orange have a VCR value ranging between 1 and 1.59.



Figure 5.8: Location of links ranked in top 20, to incur largest increases in flow and VCR between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, East of the County

12

9

25

N Key Ranking relating to links in Table 5.8

1



Figure 5.9: Location of links ranked in top 20, to incur largest increases in flow and VCR between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, West of the County

16

15

14

13

10

8

7

6

3

14

11

17 18

19

20

N

Key Ranking relating to links in Table 5.8

1



5.4.10 The majority of links in Table 5.8 do not have VCR values that exceed 0.85. Out of the twenty links to incur the largest increases in flow and VCR in the 2026 Do-Something, eight of these links are within the borough of Runnymede.

5.4.11 Out of the links ranked in Table 5.8, Horley Rd (eastbound) and the B386 Holloway Hill (eastbound) have the highest VCR values in the 2026 Do-Something, 1.12 and 1.35 respectively. These links are ranked 2nd and 17th in Table 5.8.

5.4.12 The majority of links in Table 5.8 are in close proximity to/are within the zones that are projected to incur the largest increase in trip ends (specifically origins/departures) between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, (refer to Tables 4.9 and 4.10). For example Horley Road is detailed in Table 5.8 and zone 264 (Horley – Meath Green) is in Table 4.9, and as such Horley Rd is located within zone 264. This trend also occurs with zone 379 (Ottershaw) as Chobham Ln, Trumps Green and Stroude Ln are located in close proximity to the centroid of this zone. Zone 274 (West Byfleet Town Centre) features as having some of the largest increases in origin (departure) trip ends between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something (see Table 4.9) and as such links in close proximity to this zone, A245/B382 Old Woking Rd, are featured in Table 5.8.

5.4.13 Figures 5.8 and 5.9 indicate a trend occurring, by many of the twenty links being in close proximity to each other, and thus forming small corridors of increased flow and levels of congestion. Three of these corridors being: • Horley Rd/Mill Ln, westbound (Reigate & Banstead); • Chobham Ln, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, eastbound/northbound

(Runnymede); • A245/B382 Old Woking Rd, westbound (Woking).

5.5 Difference in Flow

5.5.1 Changes in levels of traffic are shown using a bandwidth plot on the road network with comparisons to relevant scenarios. Figures 5.10 and 5.11 show the differences in traffic between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing as well as differences between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something. Bandwidths are displayed for all links within the County and also areas covering large developments that are external to Surrey. By comparing each scenario with their relevant reference it is possible to visualise the increases/decreases in traffic flows on individual links at a County scale.

5.5.2 Where bandwidths are coloured blue, this indicates an increase in flow whereas links coloured red represent a decrease in flow between the two scenarios being compared. The width of the bands displayed for each link is proportional to the increase/decrease in flow.



Figure 5.10: 2026 Do-Nothing less the 2011 base flow (results in the increases/decreases in flow between 2011 and 2026 Do-Nothing being displayed)

N Key Increase in flow for 2026 Do-Nothing Decrease in flow for 2026 Do-Nothing

Scale Approx 300 vph



Figure 5.11: 2026 Do-Something less the 2026 Do-Nothing flow (results in the increases/decreases in flow between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something being displayed)

N

Scale Approx 300 vph

Key Increase in flow for 2026 Do-Something Decrease in flow for 2026 Do-Something



5.5.3 Figure 5.10 shows a visual display of the increases/decreases in flow between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing. Therefore this growth only relates to traffic growth outside of the study area of this assessment.

5.5.4 Figure 5.10 indicates that the largest projected increases in flow on the SRN in relation to the study area are: • M25 junction 10 to 8 (anti-clockwise); • M25 junctions 13 to 12 (anti-clockwise); • M23 junctions 8 to 10 (southbound).

5.5.5 Other areas projected to incur relative increases in flow in the 2026 Do-Nothing are external to the County, such as: • A23 southbound at Crawley; • A24 northbound and southbound at Horsham; • A327 northbound and southbound at Fleet.

5.5.6 Figure 5.11 is a bandwidth plot displaying the increases/decreases in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something. The majority of links within the study area experience an increase in flow when a comparison is made to the 2026 Do-Nothing. In relation to the SRN the M25 (within Surrey) in general experiences small changes in flow, although the largest increases being in both the clockwise anti-clockwise directions between junctions 11 and 13. All other parts of the SRN in the County also experience an increase in flow, with the largest of these being: • M23 junction 10 to 8 (northbound); • A3 between M25 Wisley Interchange and Painshill (northbound).

5.5.7 With relation to the LRN there are several locations that appear to be prominent within Figure 5.11 (difference in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something): • A331 Blackwater Valley Route (BVR) (northbound); • A31 Hogs Back between A331 and Puttenham (eastbound); • Chobham Ln, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd (northbound).

5.5.8 Areas outside of the County that are projected to experience increases in flow in the 2026 Do-Something are: • West of the BVR, specifically Aldershot and the A323 (Hampshire); • Cluster of links surrounding Gatwick and Crawley, specifically the A23

southbound (West Sussex).

5.5.9 Two links within the County that are noticeable in Figure 5.11, and displaying large bandwidths of increased flow, are the B386 Holloway Hill and Green Lane travelling northbound. Both of these links are located in close proximity to each other and form a corridor crossing the M25 at junction 11.

5.5.10 Table 5.9 shows a borough/district proportional breakdown of links within the County, that fall within the top 100 and top 20 of all links to incur largest increases in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something.

5.5.11 Table 5.9 indicates that when examining increases in flow, in isolation, the borough of Runnymede contains the largest proportion of links within the top 100 and 20 largest increases in flow in the 2026 Do-Something. When ranking links based on largest increases in flow and congestion (VCR), the borough of Runnymede also contains the largest proportion of higher ranked links in the top 100 ranked links (see Table 5.7).



Total No. of Links

% of Total Links

Top 100 links to incur

largest increase in

flow

% of top 100 links to

incur largest

increase in flow

Top 20 links to incur

largest increase in

flow

% of top 20 links to incur

largest increase in

flow Elmbridge 349 7% 3 3% 0 0% Epsom & Ewell 228 5% 0 0% 0 0% Guildford 893 19% 13 13% 0 0% Mole Valley 490 10% 0 0% 0 0% Reigate & Banstead 528 11% 13 13% 2 10% Runnymede 277 6% 34 34% 12 60% Spelthorne 339 7% 11 11% 2 10% Surrey Heath 332 7% 11 11% 2 10% Tandridge 320 7% 2 2% 0 0% Waverley 507 11% 1 1% 0 0% Woking 440 9% 12 12% 2 10% Total 4703 100% 100 100% 20 100% Table 5.9: Borough/district breakdown of largest increases in flow between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something

5.5.12 Table 5.10 lists the twenty links in the County that are expected to experience the largest absolute increases in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something. The link that is to incur the largest increase in flow in the 2026 Do-Something is the B386 Holloway Hill in Runnymede, with an increase of 442 vehicles (a 24% increase).

5.5.13 Out of the twenty links displayed in Table 5.10 the A245 Old Woking Road (ranked 5th and 10th) and Horley Road (ranked 13th) are the links that incur the largest proportional increase in flow, 51%, 41% and 41% respectively.

5.5.14 A number of links occurring in the twenty largest increases in flow (Table 5.10) also appear in the top twenty ranked links based on increases in flow and VCR (Table 5.8). Such links that occur in both top twenty lists of links are: • A245 Old Woking Rd (Woking); • Trumps Green Rd (Runnymede); • Chobham Ln (Runnymede); • Stroude Rd (Runnymede); • Horley Rd (Reigate & Banstead); • B386 Holloway Hill (Runnymede); • Green Ln (Runnymede).

5.5.15 Figures 5.12 and 5.13 show the geographic locations of the twenty links in that are displayed in Table 5.10.

5.5.16 Figures 5.12 and 5.13 indicate that the majority of the twenty links in Table 5.10 are located in boroughs to the northeast of the County. Second to this, the following corridors of increased flow are apparent: • M25 junctions 12 – 13 (clockwise and anti-clockwise); • Chobham Ln / Trumps Green Rd / Stroude Rd (northbound); • B386 Holloway Hill / Green Ln (eastbound); • A245 Old Woking Rd / B382 Old Woking Rd (westbound); • A331 BVR between A3011 Lynchford Rd junction and M3 junction 4

(northbound).



Flow (All Vehicles) Link No. Link Dir Road District Capacity 2026 Do-

Nothing 2026 Do-

Something

Absolute difference 2026 DS less 2026

DN

Percentage difference 2026 DS less 2026

DN

Rank

16753 2 (E) B386 Holloway Hill Runnymede 1,700 1,848 2,290 442 24% 1 10738 2 (S) M25 J12 - 11 Runnymede 5,700 2,781 3,167 386 14% 2 16684 2 (S) M25 J13 - 12 Runnymede 9,500 4,259 4,604 345 8% 3 10740 2 (N) M25 J12 Slip On N’bound Runnymede 3,800 2,597 2,938 341 13% 4 10685 1 (W) A245 Old Woking Rd Woking 1,200 670 1,010 340 51% 5 16652 1 (N) M25 J12 - 13 Runnymede 9,500 7,973 8,298 325 4% 6 16870 1 (E) Trumps Green Road Runnymede 1,200 781 1,092 311 40% 7 12165 2 (N) A331 BVR Surrey Heath 3,500 3,022 3,326 304 10% 8 16853 1 (E) M25 J13 (part of gyratory) Spelthorne 9,500 3,384 3,670 285 8% 9 10688 1 (W) A245 Old Woking Rd Woking 1,200 681 957 276 41% 10

1100 1 (E) A23 Brighton Rd Reigate & Banstead 3,500 1,036 1,310 274 26% 11 12164 2 (N) A331 BVR Surrey Heath 3,500 1,347 1,612 264 20% 12 15684 2 (E) Horley Road Reigate & Banstead 800 633 896 262 41% 13 16749 2 (E) Chobham Lane Runnymede 1,200 718 979 261 36% 14 16855 1 (S) M25 J13 (part of gyratory) Spelthorne 9,500 4,000 4,254 254 6% 15 10742 2 (N) M25 J12 Slip On N’bound Runnymede 3,800 2,175 2,421 247 11% 16 12166 2 (N) A331 BVR Surrey Heath 3,500 2,834 3,069 235 8% 17 17179 1 (W) A331 BVR (part of gyratory south of M3 J4) Surrey Heath 3,500 2,577 2,811 234 9% 18 15914 1 (E) Green Ln Runnymede 1,200 914 1,146 232 25% 19 16392 1 (N) Stroude Rd Runnymede 1,700 278 502 224 81% 20 Table 5.10: Twenty links in the County that are forecast to incur the largest increases in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something



13

11


1



Figure 5.13: Location of links ranked in top 20, to incur largest increases in flow and VCR between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, east of the County



Figure 5.12: Location of links ranked in top 20, to incur largest increases in flow and VCR between 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, west of the County

16

15

14

8

6

3

1

17

18

19

20


1

2

5

47

9

10

12



5.6 Merge and Diverge Assessment of the SRN

5.6.1 A form of highway capacity assessment was undertaken on the merge and diverge junctions of the M25 junctions 10 and 11.

5.6.2 The assessment utilised the guidelines in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) using observed flows for 2010 and the modelled flows for the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something.

5.6.3 The DMRB Volume 6 (Road Geometry) Section 2 (Junctions) was used in conjunction with the mainline and merge and diverge flows of the M25 junctions 10 and 11, to determine the junction layout that is required for each scenario.

5.6.4 It was thought appropriate to also assess the junction layouts for 2010 using observed flows. Therefore observed flows for 2010 were obtained from the Highways Agency’s (HA) Traffic Database System (TRADS) for the average weekday (Monday to Friday) in the month of September (where possible), for the 0800 – 0900 time period. It is important to note that the flows were extracted for the on and off slips of junctions 10 and 11, as well as the initial mainline (junctions 9 to 10 and 12 to 11). Flows for the other sections of the carriageways were calculated using these flows, allowing consistent flows downstream. The 2010 flows that were extracted from TRADS, rounded to nearest fifty vehicles.

5.6.5 Table 5.11 displays the type of merge/diverge junction layouts that have been determined for the M25 junctions 10 and 11, according to the flows and DMRB guidelines. All junction layouts were identified with reference to the merge/diverge graphs and junction diagrams shown in the DMRB (see Appendix D). The existing layout was obtained by use of aerial photographs, whilst the 2010 layouts were determined by use of the observed flows from TRADS. 2011, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something flows were extracted from the SINTRAM model.

5.6.6 The key for Table 5.11 is as follows: • C1 = Diverge, lane drop at taper diverge; • D2 = Diverge, lane drop at parallel diverge; • E1 = Merge, lane gain; • F1 = Merge, lane gain with ghost island merge (nearside lane of merge is lane

gain); • F2 = Merge, lane gain with ghost island merge (offside lane of merge is lane

gain).

Road Merge / Diverge

Existing

Layout

2010 Proposed Layout

2011 Proposed Layout

2026 DN Proposed Layout

2026 DS Proposed Layout

Comment

M25 J10 Slip Off Nbound Diverge D,2 D,2 D,2 D,2 D,2 Constant M25 J10 Slip On Nbound Merge F,1 F,2 F,2 F,2 F,2 Capacity Required M25 J10 Slip Off Sbound Diverge D,2 D,2 D,2 C,1 C,1 Spare Capacity M25 J10 Slip On Sbound Merge F,2 F,2 F,2 E,1 E,1 Spare Capacity M25 J11 Slip Off Nbound Diverge D,2 C,1 C,1 D,2 D,2 Constant M25 J11 Slip On Nbound Merge F,2 F,2 F,2 F,2 F,2 Constant M25 J11 Slip Off Sbound Diverge D,2 D,2 D,2 D,2 D,2 Constant M25 J11 Slip On Sbound Merge F,1 E,1 F,2 F,2 F,2 Capacity Required



Table 5.11: M25 junctions 10 and 11 assessment of merge/diverge layouts

5.6.7 See Appendix E for diagrammatic interpretations of details shown in Table 5.11.



5.6.8 Table 5.11 indicates whether the junctions have spare capacity, require additional capacity or the capacity requirements remain constant. These provisional statements are based on the differences between the existing layout and the 2026 Do-Something proposed layout.

5.6.9 Table 5.11 indicates that the majority of the merges/diverges of the M25 junctions 10 and 11 do not require any additional capacity based on the flows and DRMB guidance. However, two merges are suggesting an increase in additional capacity in the 2026 Do-Something (based on the modelled flows of this assessment), specifically junction 10 slip on northbound and junction 11 slip off southbound. However, the merge requirements for both of these on slip junctions remain constant between the modelled 2011 base and 2026 Do-Something, with a suggested merge layout of a lane gain with a ghost island merge, (offside lane of the merge being the lane gain) (category F,2).

5.6.10 Table 5.12 shows the flows for all sections of the M25 between junctions 10 and 11 and these are the flows that were utilised for the junction layout assessment of the merges and diverges. VCR values are also displayed, cells coloured green have a VCR value equal to or greater than 0.85.

5.6.11 Table 5.12 indicates that the variation in flows on the specified sections of the SRN is minimal between the 2011 and 2026 Do-Something, as the largest change in flow is 178 vehicles between junctions 12 and 11 (southbound). The VCR values for all links in Table 5.12 are below a value of 1, although a number of links encounter a VCR value above 0.85 (suggesting levels of congestion have been reached), specifically in a northbound direction between junctions 10 and 11.

5.6.12 In general both Tables 5.11 and 5.12 indicate that, generally, there is not a need to increase capacity at the merges and diverges of junctions 10 and 11 of the M25, to accommodate traffic generated from the committed and non-committed planned development, and additional Great Britain growth outside Surrey to the forecast year of 2026.



Flows (Car + LGV +HGV) VCR Absolute Difference in Flow Absolute Difference in VCR

Road 2010

Observed2011

Modelled2026 DN Modelled

2026 DS Modelled 2011 2026 DN 2026 DS 2011 less

2010 2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN

2026 DN less 2011

2026 DS less 2026

DN M25 J9 - 10 (Nbound) 5,250 7,314 7,339 7,412 0.96 0.97 0.98 2,064 25 73 0.01 0.01 M25 J10 Slip Off Nbound 1,500 2,382 2,406 2,340 0.63 0.63 0.62 882 24 -66 0.00 -0.01 M25 J10 Mainline through junction Nbound 3,750 4,932 4,933 5,072 0.87 0.87 0.89 1,182 1 139 0.00 0.02 M25 J10 Slip On Nbound 2,400 2,297 2,334 2,265 0.60 0.61 0.60 -103 37 -69 0.01 -0.01 M25 J10 - 11 (Nbound) 6,150 7,229 7,268 7,337 0.95 0.96 0.97 1,079 39 69 0.01 0.01 M25 J11 Slip Off Nbound 1,100 1,687 1,753 1,777 0.44 0.46 0.47 587 66 24 0.02 0.01 M25 J11 Mainline through junction Nbound 5,050 5,542 5,515 5,560 0.97 0.97 0.98 492 -27 45 0.00 0.01 M25 J11 Slip On Nbound 1,700 1,350 1,426 1,537 0.36 0.38 0.40 -350 76 111 0.02 0.02 M25 J11 - 12 (Nbound) 6,750 6,892 6,940 7,097 0.91 0.91 0.93 142 48 157 0.00 0.02 M25 J12 - 11 (Sbound) 7,000 5,798 5,871 6,049 0.76 0.77 0.80 -1,202 73 178 0.01 0.03 M25 J11 Slip Off Sbound 1,800 1,302 1,336 1,484 0.34 0.35 0.39 -498 34 148 0.01 0.04 M25 J11 Mainline through junction Sbound 5,200 4,495 4,535 4,566 0.79 0.80 0.80 -705 40 31 0.01 0.00 M25 J11 Slip On Sbound 900 1,509 1,569 1,567 0.40 0.41 0.41 609 60 -2 0.01 0.00 M25 J11 - 10 (Sbound) 6,100 6,005 6,104 6,132 0.79 0.80 0.81 -95 99 28 0.01 0.01 M25 J10 Slip Off Sbound 2,200 991 990 1,059 0.26 0.26 0.28 -1,209 -1 69 0.00 0.02 M25 J11 Mainline though junction Sbound 3,900 5,013 5,114 5,073 0.88 0.90 0.89 1,113 101 -41 0.02 -0.01 M25 J11 Slip On Sbound 1,400 1,276 1,325 1,329 0.34 0.35 0.35 -124 49 4 0.01 0.00 M25 J10 - 9 (Sbound) 5,300 6,289 6,439 6,403 0.83 0.85 0.84 989 150 -36 0.02 -0.01 Table 5.12: Flows and VCR values for the M25 between junctions 10 and 11



6 CONCLUSION

6.1 Context

6.1.1 This ‘Cumulative Assessment of Future Development Impacts on the Highway Network’ study was undertaken to consider the cumulative impacts of all known future development within Surrey, as well as large developments located externally to the County, with respect to highway capacity, to the likely additional traffic generated by committed and non-committed planned residential and commercial development, as proposed in the emerging Core Strategies of the Local Development Frameworks for the borough and districts in and around Surrey.

6.1.2 The main aims of the cumulative transport assessment were to:





6.1.3 The main objectives of the cumulative transport assessment were to:



• Forecast the traffic impacts of individual developments on the SRN and LRN;

• Act as a starting point for identifying locations which may either require additional infrastructure provision for transport services or further study to identify appropriate mitigation measures;


6.1.4 The main benefit of this approach was to ensure that any strategic infrastructure requirements identified could be used to support the districts and boroughs needs to produce local Infrastructure Delivery Plans (IDP) using a common and consistent strategic evidence base. This evidence base could also be used to support future bids for Central Government funding for transport infrastructure and services.

6.1.5 2026 trip generation forecasts for the boroughs/districts in Surrey and developments external to the County were derived from combining planning data (sourced from the borough/districts where possible) and the TRICS database. TEMPRO forecasts were utilised for borough/districts and external developments where planning data was absent. 2026 trip generation was then used to



generate forecast matrices for the scenarios. An assumption was made in the trip generation process that all trips prior to 2011 are committed by planning permission and all trips post 2011 are non-committed planned estimates.

6.1.6 The modelling of the forecast scenarios enabled broad comparisons to be made between the base and forecast years. The main focus of this report has been the estimated impacts between the 2011 base year (consisting of committed development only), the 2026 Do-Nothing (no development growth in the study area but rest of Country grows to 2026) and the 2026 Do-Something (based on 2026 Do-Nothing but 2011 to 2026 non-committed planned development is added to the study area).

6.1.7 Analysis of the available planning data suggests that in the 2026 Do-Something scenario the modelled zone in Surrey to incur the largest amount of estimated additional departure trips is zone 379 Ottershaw (Runnymede) with a projected increase of 758 departure trips. Whereas zone 383 Addlestone Moor (Runnymede) is projected to gain the largest amount of estimated additional arrival trips, 282 trips. Explanation as to why zone 379 Ottershaw is estimated to incur the largest amount of departure trips is related to the redevelopment of the former Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) site, that is located in close proximity to the zone in Runnymede. Modelled zones in the borough of Reigate and Banstead are predicted to incur the largest proportion of additional trips in the 2026 Do-Something, compared to all other Surrey borough/districts.

6.1.8 The main outcomes of this cumulative assessment are based on aggregations of modelled outputs from network summary statistics including vehicle kilometrage, travel times and average speeds and the relationships between them. Detailed analysis has been undertaken on the SRN by comparing journey times. Known congestion ‘bottlenecks’ have been assessed by comparing current cost of congestion data against volume capacity ratio plots. Traffic flow and congestion impacts between scenarios have been ranked for both the SRN and LRN and finally a highway capacity assessment has been undertaken on several motorway merges and diverges.

6.2 Traffic Impacts on the SRN in Surrey

6.2.1 In the 2026 Do-Nothing the motorway links experience the largest absolute increase in vehicle kilometres when compared to the 2011 base, (an increase of 7,933 veh kms / 0.7% increase). As a result, the motorway links also experience the largest absolute increase in vehicle hours (an increase of 476 veh hrs / 2.5% increase) and largest decrease in average speed (a decrease of 1.10 kph / 1.7% decrease) in the 2026 Do-Nothing (compared to the 2011 base). It is to be expected that the motorway links incur the largest increases in traffic impacts in the 2026 Do-Nothing (compared to the 2011 base) as the increase in trip ends in the 2026 Do-Nothing occurred external to the study area, so only increase in flow in Surrey relates to long distance trips travelling through the County, which are likely to use the SRN.

6.2.2 The motorway and trunk A road links are not forecast to experience the largest increases in vehicle kilometres or vehicle hours in the 2026 Do-Something (compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing), this occurs on principal A roads. This suggests that as additional trips generated from the 2011 to 2026 non-committed planned development make greater use of the LRN in Surrey.



6.2.3 The increases in congestion and flow are relatively minor on the SRN in the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, as shown by the minimal increases in journey times. The journey times were assessed for the Surrey sections of the M25, M23, M3 and A3 for the 2011 base, 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something. The largest absolute increase in journey time on the Surrey SRN between the 2011 base and 2026 Do-Nothing is forecast to occur on the M25 between junctions 5 and 14 (clockwise), with an increase of 2 minutes 17 seconds (3.3% increase), with 1 minute 17 seconds of this increase occurring between junctions 5 and 6. Whereas the largest absolute increase in SRN journey time from comparisons between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something is on the M3 between junctions 4 and 1 (northbound), with an increase of 1 minute 32 seconds (3.6% increase). Of this 1 minute 32 second increase on the northbound section of the M3, 1 minute and 1 second of the increase is experienced between junctions 3 and 2.

6.2.4 In relation to largest increases in flow on the SRN, these occur in the 2026 Do-Something specifically on the M25 between junctions 11 and 13 (clockwise and anti-clockwise) and the M23 between junctions 10 and 8 (northbound). In relation to the M25, junction 12 to 11 (anti-clockwise) is ranked as the having the second largest absolute increase in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something in the County, with an increase in flow of 386 vehicles (14% increase). Second to this, the M25 junction 13 to 12 (anti-clockwise) is forecast as having the third largest increase in flow (345 vehicles / 8% increase) and junction 12 to 13 (clockwise) is expected to incur the sixth largest increase in flow in the County (325 vehicles / 4% increase). In relation to this, the M25 junction 12 slip on northbound is forecast to incur an increase of flow of 247 vehicles (11% increase and ranked sixteenth largest increase in the County).

6.2.5 The sections of the SRN forecast to experience the highest values of congestion (VCR value ranging between 1 and 1.59) in the 2026 Do-Something are the M3 junctions 4 to 1 (northbound), the M25 junction 13 to 14 (clockwise) and the A3 between the Ripley and M25 Wisley Interchange junctions (northbound).

6.2.6 Sections of the SRN are forecast to incur traffic impacts related to the forecast additional development, however the impacts in relation to journey times and flows are not thought to be of such a significance to cause major disruption to the SRN network, under normal AM peak hour travelling conditions.

6.3 Traffic Impacts on the LRN of Surrey

6.3.1 The category of roads forecast to experience the largest absolute increases in vehicle kilometres and vehicle hours in the 2026 Do-Something is the principal A road category. For example, the principal A roads in Surrey are estimated to experience an increase in vehicle kilometres of 28,947 veh kms (3.0% increase) relating to an increase in vehicle hours of 878 veh hrs (4.1% increase).

6.3.2 When observing the ranking of Surrey links based on the largest absolute increases in VCR and flow as well as the percentage increases in flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something, 18% of the top 10% of total links are in the borough of Reigate and Banstead, and 21% of the top 100 links are in the borough of Runnymede.

6.3.3 All links ranked in the top twenty of increased flow and VCR in the 2026 Do-Something, form part of the LRN in Surrey. From these top twenty links small



corridors of increased flow and VCR are apparent in the 2026 Do-Something, three of these being: • Horley Rd/Mill Ln, westbound (Reigate and Banstead); • Chobham Ln, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, eastbound/northbound

(Runnymede); • A245/B382 Old Woking Rd, westbound (Woking).

6.3.4 Many links with high ranking of increased flow and VCR are in the same location or in close proximity to the zones that are to experience the largest amount of additional trips in the 2026 Do-Something. Examples of this are zones 379 (Ottershaw) and zone 264 (Horley – Meath Green) are to experience the largest amount of additional departure trips in the 2026 Do-Something and the Chobham Lane, Stroude Green corridor as well as the Horley Rd/Mill Ln corridors are located near to these zones.

6.3.5 When considering the absolute increases in flow in isolation between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something for the LRN, the borough of Runnymede contains 34% links that are in the top 100 links to incur the largest increases in absolute flow, and Runnymede also contains 60% of links in the top 20.

6.3.6 The link forecast to experience the largest increase in absolute flow between the 2026 Do-Nothing and 2026 Do-Something (as a result of additional trips generated from non-committed planned development) is the B386 Holloway Hill eastbound (Runnymede), with an increase of 442 vehicles (a 24% increase).

6.3.7 The main areas/corridors of the LRN in the County to experience largest absolute increases in flow in the 2026 Do-Something are as follows: • B386 Holloway Hill and Green Ln, eastbound (Runnymede); • Chobham Rd, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Ln, northbound

(Runnymede); • A245/B382 Old Woking Rd, southbound (Woking); • A331 BVR (between A3011 Lynchford Rd and M3 junction 4 junctions),

northbound (Surrey Heath).

6.4 Summary of Impacts

6.4.1 The main results for both the SRN and LRN are summarised in the table below. The table is based on the greatest changes in flow, density and speed between 2026 Do-Something and 2026 Do Nothing modelled scenarios.

6.4.2 The table highlights sections of both the SRN and LRN within Surrey that are sensitive to reasonably significant increases in traffic flow, exacerbating and prolonging existing levels of congestion, resulting in reduced levels of service and reduced journey time reliability during the am peak hour for local roads in and around urban areas and on the approaches and along the mainline of the SRN.

6.4.3 Corridors of increased flow and congestion have been identified in the 2026 Do-Something and the majority of these are located in the borough of Runnymede, and a reason for the generation of these corridors of increased flow is the proximity to the zones gaining the largest amount of additional trips (departures and arrivals).

6.4.4 As such levels of congestion and flow increase on the majority of LRN links in the County in the 2026 Do-Something, with localised areas experiencing increases in traffic impacts. However, the overall impact of these increases is relatively



insignificant as the proportional increases/decreases in vehicle kilometres, vehicle hours and average speeds are relatively minor. For example the largest proportional increase, at a County level, is a 4.9% increase in vehicle hours on B roads in the 2026 Do-Something, when compared to the 2026 Do-Nothing.

Criteria SRN LRN

Journey Time • M3 Junction 4 to 1 (specifically Junction 3 to 2)

• A23 corridor • A320 corridor

Volume/Capacity Ratio

• M25 Junctions 13 to 14 • M3 Junctions 4 to 1 • A3 from Ripley to M25 Wisley

Interchange

• Horley Rd/ Mill Ln, westbound (Reigate & Banstead)

• Chobham Ln, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, northbound (Runnymede)


Difference in Flow

• M25 Junction 11 to 13 • M25 J13 to 11 • M23 J10 to 8

• B386 Holloway Hill, Green Ln, eastbound (Runnymede)

• Chobham Rd, Trumps Green Rd and Stroude Rd, northbound (Runnymede)


• A331 Blackwater Valley Route, northbound (Surrey Heath)

Table 6.1: Summary of Impacts on the SRN and LRN

6.5 Conclusions

6.5.1 The analysis suggests that although major additional highway capacity infrastructure investment such as motorway widening, or local bypasses is not necessary to meet the demands of future development, other types of highway capital schemes in some urban areas, at key junctions and other sensitive locations will be required in order to promote and manage the additional demand due to the future development. These schemes will not necessarily create additional capacity but which will assist in managing or improving journey time reliability and levels of service by managing the impacts to ensure congestion - both delay and journey time reliability - does not deteriorate beyond current levels.

6.5.2 Given that providing additional capacity is no longer considered to be the best solution except in certain locations and for particular circumstances, a mix of solutions will be required involving a wide range of tools. This mix of solutions includes demand management, integrated land use & transport planning, network management, traffic management, freight & goods management and behavioural change. Many of these solutions are contained within Surrey’s recently adopted Surrey Transport Plan (STP3) which include strategies and associated toolkits to provide adequate mitigation measures and assist in the formulation of robust Infrastructure Delivery Plans.

6.5.3 The results and analysis of this cumulative assessment of future development impacts in Surrey, have been presented and endorsed by the ‘Surrey Infrastructure Project Board’ in July 2011.



6.6 Limitations of Study

6.6.1 Given the strategic nature of the highway capacity assessment and modelling methodology used there are a number of limitations which need to be considered during the preparation and interpretation of the highway capacity impacts on both the SRN and LRN within this report which are set out below.

6.6.2 The results presented in this report are based on local planning estimates from the emerging Core Strategies of the boroughs and districts, which are all at different stages within the LDF process, and are based on estimates available as of February 2010, hence, any future changes to the size and distribution of housing and commercial provision may alter the impacts and interpretation of the analysis of this assessment.

6.6.3 The limitations of the planning estimates (such as the varying degrees of available planning data internally and external to Surrey and the uncertainty of the size, distribution and land-use of any future planned developments) the interpretation of the likely impacts on both the SRN and LRN within this assessment should be treated as broad strategic projections, and as such further work would be recommended, (including complementary analysis using appropriate modelling \ assessment tools), to further assist in the identification of additional infrastructure needs and other potential mitigation measures at a more local and detailed level.

6.6.4 The cumulative county-wide transport assessment assumes that all the committed and non-committed planned estimates of development would occur simultaneously and that any impacts described in this report do not account for any possible mitigation, demand management or infrastructure provision and effectively present a worse case situation.

CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS … · Cumulative Assessment of Future...

Documents

Transcript of CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS … · Cumulative Assessment of Future...