Part B Water Row Appendices Full Spreads Final

Water Row, Govan
Part B: Appendices
Part B: Appendices
Contents
B1 Stakeholder Consultation 5
(Refer to Part C Stakeholder Consultation for more
detailed information)
B2 Architectural Drawings 7
B3 Landscape Strategy 17
B4 Engineering Drawings 32
B5 Area schedules 38
B6 Cost Plan 40
B7 Art Strategy Approach 54
B8 Briefing Document for Commercial Viability 58

Assessment
B9 Cook Creative Statement of Potential 68
B10 Desktop S.I. Executive Summary 72
B11 Tree Survey 74
B12 Floor Risk Analysis 92
B13 Traffic Impact Assessment 128
View looking towards Water Row from the River Clyde, Collective Architecture 2018
p2
Event 4H – Pearce Street Showpeople
B1
Water Row Masterplan Friday 20th April
Event 4J – Water Row Showpeople

Friday 20th April
Pre-application Consultation Plan Event List
Event 4K - City Deal Bridge Team  Stakeholder Consultation
Tuesday 20th March and Tuesday 24th April
Updated October 2018 Event 5 (A-C)
21st, 23rd and 24th March 2018
Event 1 
6th December 2017 Public Event No.2 - Travelling Roadshow The schedule overleaf provides and overview of the extent and
Using the site model and bicycle trailer to visit a variety of locations and groups in and around Water Row. 3-
Community Event: Govan Loves Christmas
D site model used as tool to gather opinion and thoughts in relation to existing site and developing design nature of consultation events that took place as part of the
Pre-arranged community event at Water Row. 
ideas.  Masterplan Design Development.
Project team presented ideas relating to public realm and small model within Govan Central Action Plan’s
Event 5A - Drop-in consultation at the Riverside Hall.
stall.
Wednesday 21st 10am-1pm
The extensive consultation and engagement work has been further
Event 2
w/c 11th December 2017 Event 5B - Model Roadshow Event: Govan Tour  documented within Part C Stakeholder Consultation Report.
Stakeholder Surgeries Friday 23rd March 2018 1pm-5pm
The project team hosted a series of stakeholder workshops - or ‘surgeries’ - at Glasgow City Council and
1pm - 2.30pm Govan Cross including Cafe 13 and Govan Cross Shopping Centre
Govan Housing Association offices. Attendees include: Council officers and elected members, CGAP
2.30pm - 3pm Langlands Path
The Stakeholder Consultation Report (Part C) documents each
Steering Group members, Govan Community Council, Govan Heritage Trust. Discussions focused around a
series of themes to identify key constraints and opportunities for the site and brief. 3pm - 4pm Elder Park and Library  consultation event in more detail.
4.30pm - 5pm Govan Cross
Event 3
18th January 2018 Event 5C - Model Roadshow Event: Venues
Saturday 24th March 11am-4pm
Public Event No.1: Tell us about Water Row’
Public event at the Pearce Institute where the project team presented background information and model
11am - 1pm - Riverside Museum
relating to the masterplan to garner local ideas and opportunities surrounding existing site.
2pm - 4pm – Govan Cross Shopping Centre
Event 4 series (A-K)
Event 6
February-March 2018 
Thursday 5th April
Stakeholder Event: Urban Design Panel.
Stakeholder Events: Focused local events within Govan
Design review at Glasgow City Chambers hosted by the local authority and invited stakeholders.
Series of focused presentations, meetings and workshops in and around Govan with a variety of
Architectural model and work-in progress presented and discussed.
stakeholders, residents and local interest groups to listen to their views and aspirations for the Water Row
masterplan.
Event 7
Water Row, Govan
Event 4A - Govan Heritage Trust  Thursday 3rd May 3pm-7pm
Public Event No.3: Water Row Option Selection at the Pearce Institute
Part C: Stakeholder Consultation
Wednesday 31st January
Architectural model and work-in progress will be available for public discussion.
Public comments to be recorded and fed back to design & client team. Formal PAN event.
Event 4B - Roads and Planning meeting
Monday 5th March
Event 8
Tuesday 19th June 2018 Stakeholder Consultation Report Part C that accompanies the Main Report Part A.
Event 4C - Govan Reminiscence Group
Central Govan Action Plan Steering Group Presentation.
Tuesday 6th March
Event 9
Event 4D - Networking Breakfast at the Community Hub, Govan Rd.  
Saturday 30th June
Friday 9th March
Public Event No.4: Water Row Masterplan at Govan Family Fun Day
Presentation of proposed vision and masterplan (using model and images) to key stakeholders followed by
Event 4E – Door to door & on street engagement by the Community Hub Team
public event to review and discuss.
12th March - 16th March 2018
Door to door and on street engagement by The Hub team.
Summary project info sheet to be available for discussion by The Hub team.
Note 1:
Public to be informed of further consultation dates.
Newsletters were circulated to 2700 homes in April 2018 in advance of advertised PAN event in April
Public comments to be recorded and fed back to design & client team.
2018 and were published on the CGAP website for the duration of the project.
Note 2:
Event 4F - GCC Flood Team
Events 7 (Public Event 3) will form the official advertised Pre-Application Consultation in accordance
Tuesday 13th March
with PAN guidance (advertised in the Evening Times).
Note 3:
Event 4G - Govan Community Council
All information boards presented at Public Events 3 were published on the CGAP website for the
Monday 9th April
duration of the project.
p4 p5
B2
255400
255500
255600
255700
REV - REVISION NOTE - DATE - BY -
f
de A Red line boundary line updated. 6/3/18 ML
Shingle B Red line boundary updated to inlcude open space to 26/3/18 ML

the east of Napier Road.
Mea
nH
igh
Wa
ter S
prin
gs
Go
va
nW
ha
rf
ML
Architectural Drawings
W
S
Shingle
666000 666000
Bol
48
Shingle
46 Landing Stage
S
LW
&M
WS
MH
LW
CC
The following pages present the architectural drawings produced to
Govan Wharf
32
support the Masterplan Document Part A.
Bdy
st
Me
on
an
C
Hig
h
hW
rg
Bu
ate
rS Sh
pri ing
ng le
s
Riv
nd
U
er
Cly
de Water Row - Character Zones
MH
WS Bo
&M llard
Condition A - through Pearce Lane

LW s
Condition C
S
MH
Govan Old &M
LW
S
Parish Church Sh Landing
ing
le Stage
665900 665900
Slo
pin
gm
as
on
ry
Mean Low Water Springs

15
ard Landing Stage

oll
B
Lo
we
Lin rH
e
O arb
fP
os
Mean High Water Springs
ou
ts r
W
RO
ER
AT
W
892
ma
so
nry
894
17
Mud
Sloping
21
SM
15 23
21
Post
6.3m
665800 Pe PE ma 665800
arc
17
AR so
10
War Meml e In CE 11 nry

stit LA
NE
27
ute
T
9
EE
840
R
to 8
ST
60 Mud
Post
Sloping
CE
AR
W
PE
819
RO
Condition B - through Water Row

ER
803 ma
811
AT
31 37 son
W
801 ry
9
PH
83 Post
0
5
5 SM
18
Statue
Sloping
Mud
Cycle Hire Station
1
6.1m 82 Surgery
STREET 0 MHWS
BURLEIGH Bank
NAPIER TERRACE Post KEY
81
23 6
29 SM
15 to
43 21
7 to 13 SM Red line denotes site boundary
27
Dashed orange line denotes
2 masterplan boundary (200m
Post
radius)
78 El Sub Sta
7
6.0m
New
Gova
NAPIER ROAD
n Play Area
Churc
h NOTES -
10 DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING

79 Post
6 ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY
WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES NOTIFIED IN WRITING.
79
4
79
REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,

5
LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND

VENTILATION INFORMATION
79
0
779 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

78 BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED.
52
8
Bank
78
665700 665700
6
78
Shopping Centre 11
4
23 CLIENT -
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council
Shelter PROJECT -
Water Row Masterplan
DRAWING -
78
Existing Site Plan

0
DATE - BY - SCALE -
February 2018 ML 1:500 @ A0 / 1: 1250 @ A3

5.5m
JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
20122 JB (EX)1000
7
15
29
NAPIER PLACE
MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB
Bus Station TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ

0 25 50 75 100 M TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
255400
255500
255600
255700
EMAIL INFO@COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK
WWW.COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK
Serial number: 128517
p6 p7
Existing Elevation Studies
REV -
A
B
REVISION NOTE -
Block F added to area schedule.

Area schedule updated.
DATE -
20/6/18
3/7/18
BY -
ML
B2
Block A Block B Block C Block D Block E Block F Block G
2B 4P 12 2B 4P 18 2B 4P 36 2B 4P 21 2B 4P 45 Town House 5 2B 4P 27
House 2 1B 2P 8 House 9 House 1
Town House 2 2B 3P 14
Total units 16 Total units 40 Total units 45 Total units 21 Total units 46 Total units 5 Total units 27
18m
Commercial 650sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 650sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 550sqm
15m (double height) (over 2 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)
12m
9m
6m
3m
Shingle
masonry d
Shingle Sloping masonry Mu
SM
Sl
op
ing
rf A1 A2 B1 Dashed line
Pearce Lane Govan Old nW
ha
denotes
Go
va Govan existing inlet Po
st
Workspace st
Note:
Po
North Elevation looking towards Pearce Lane 23 27
B2 21
Block B
Refer to Roof Plan
32
Block A 17
on Page 12 for
Storey Heights
15
31
11
18m
15m
12m
C2 C4 C1
WATER ROW
9m
6m
3m
E
AC Total
RR
5 TE
ld ER
PI
nO h NA Flats 159
va c
Go h ur
C
r ish
20 17 27 Block D Terrace T/H 41
Pa
Total units 200

E1 Block F Commercial 3500sqm
m 45
6.3
Block C 2
KEY
Govan Old
East Elevation along Water Row
C2 E3 Pla
yA
rea Ground Floor
00
59
66
WATER ROW
NA
Block E E2
P
IE
R
17
RO
PEARCE LANE
G2 NOTES -
AD
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING
ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY

10
9
21
18m LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND
15m
5
12m BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED.
17
PEARCE STREET
ry ov an
9m
r ge
Ne wG
Su
6m
rch
1
Chu
9
3m CLIENT -
Institute nk
796 PROJECT -
892 Pearce Ba Water Row Masterplan
820
816 DRAWING -
830
786
840 to 86
0 794
790 Ba
nk G1 Sketch Layout - Ground Floor
894 788 DATE - BY - SCALE -

784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
m
ml 6.0 JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
Me
ar 20122 JB (SK)007-1
W m
6.1
er
elt
Sh
The Pearce Institute e 779 5.5

m
atu 787
00 St
58
66 801
803
South Elevation along Govan Road MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB
811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
13
PH 7 to
819
T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
EE 15 to
R
ST 23
20
25
29
55
H
00
G
EI
RL
p8 BU
p9
REV -
A
B
REVISION NOTE -

DATE -
20/6/18
3/7/18
BY -
REV -
A
B
REVISION NOTE -

DATE -
20/6/18
3/7/18
BY -
ML
ML
B2
Block A Block B Block C Block D Block E Block F Block G 2B 4P 12 2B 4P 18 2B 4P 36 2B 4P 21 2B 4P 45 Town House 5 2B 4P 27
2B 4P 12 2B 4P 18 2B 4P 36 2B 4P 21 2B 4P 45 Town House 5 2B 4P 27 House 2 1B 2P 8 House 9 House 1
House 2 1B 2P 8 House 9 House 1 Town House 2 2B 3P 14
Total units 16 Total units 40 Total units 45 Total units 21 Total units 46 Total units 5 Total units 27 Commercial 650sqm
Commercial 850sqm Commercial 650sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 550sqm (double height) (over 2 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)
(double height) (over 2 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)
Shingle
Shingle masonry d
masonry d
Shingle Sloping masonry Mu SM
SM
Sl
op
Sl
op
ing
ing
A1 A2 B1 ha
ha
rf Dashed line nW denotes
ov
anW
Govan
denotes
existing inlet st Go
st
Po
G
Workspace Workspace st
st Po
Po 23 27
23 B2 21
Note:
27
B2 21
Block B
Block B Note:
32
32
Block A Block A 17
Refer to Roof Plan

17
Refer to Roof Plan

15
on Page 12 for
15
on Page 12 for
31
Storey Heights 11
31
Storey Heights
11
C2 C4 C1
WATER ROW
C2 C4 C1
WATER ROW
E
E AC Total
AC Total RR
RR 5 TE
5 TE ER
d ER ld PI
Ol nO
I
AP NA Flats 159
va
n
ch
N Flats 159 va
ur
ch
Go ur Go
Ch Ch
ish Block D ir sh
20 17 Block D Terrace T/H 41
Pa
r 20 17 Terrace T/H 41 Pa
Total units 200 Raised deck

Total units 200
Raised deck
E1 Block F Commercial 3500sqm E1 Block F Commercial 3500sqm
Raised deck
Raised deck
m
6.3
m 6.3
Block C KEY
Block C 2
KEY
2
Typical Upper
C2 E3 Pla
y Ar
ea
First Floor C2 E3 Pla
yA
rea
Floor
00
00 59
59 66
66
WATER ROW
WATER ROW
NA
NA
Block E E2
PI
Block E E2
PI
ER
ER
17
RO
17
RO
PEARCE LANE
PEARCE LANE
G2 NOTES -
AD
G2 NOTES -
A D
ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY
10
10
9
21
9
21
REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING, REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,
LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND
VENTILATION INFORMATION VENTILATION INFORMATION
10 10 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT
5
ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT
5
BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED. BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED.
17
PEARCE STREET
17
an
PEARCE STREET
ry ov an ery Gov
r ge
Ne wG Su
rg New
Su c h
rch r
1
u
1
Chu Ch
9
9
CLIENT - CLIENT -
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council
Institute 796
Institute nk
796 PROJECT -
nk
Pearce
PROJECT -
892 Ba Water Row Masterplan
820 820
816 816 DRAWING -
830 DRAWING - 830
786 786
840 to 86
0 794
nk G1 Sketch Layout - First Floor
840 to 86
0 794
790 Ba
nk G1 Sketch Layout - Typical Upper
790 Ba 788
894 788 DATE - BY - SCALE - 894 DATE - BY - SCALE -
784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
m m
6.0 ml 6.0
ml JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO - JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
Me Me
ar 20122 JB (SK)007-2 ar 20122 JB (SK)007-3
W m W m
6.1 6.1
er er
elt elt
Sh Sh
m m
e 779 5.5 e 779 5.5
atu 787 atu 787
00 St 00 St
58 58
66 66 801
801
803 803
MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB
811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888

13 13
PH 7 to PH 7 to
24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ 24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ
819
819
T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270 T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
EE 15 to EE 15 to
R R
ST 23
ST 23
20 20
25
25
29 29
55
55
H H
00
00
G G
EI EI
RL RL
p 10 BU BU
p 11
B2
Character Zones and Typologies Couryard Terraces
Shingle
Shingle
Sloping masonry
masonry 3B 5P - 130sqm
Mu
d
SM
REV -Springs
REVISION NOTE - DATE - BY -
Mean High Water
Sl
A Block F added to area schedule. 20/6/18 ML
op
ing
B Area schedule updated. 3/7/18 ML
3B 5P Courtyard Terraces
House 2 1B 2P 8 House 9 House 1 W
ha
rf Dashed line
denotes
n
Town House 2 2B 3P 14 Go
st
Workspace st
Po
Total units 16 Total units 40 Total units 45 Total units 21 Total units 46 Total units 5 Total units 27 21
23 27
Commercial 650sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 650sqm Commercial 850sqm 32 Commercial 550sqm Block B
Block A
SVP SVP
(double height) (over 2 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height) 17
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
Bathroom Bathroom
4.8sqm 4.8sqm
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
15
31
11
Couryard Terraces
WATER ROW
Shingle
3B 5P - 130sqm Second
masonry d
SM
Sl
E
op
AC Total
ing
RR
5 TE
d ER
Ol
I
AP
va
n
ch
N Flats 187
A1 A2 B1 Go ur
ha
rf Dashed line Ch
nW
Govan
denotes r is h
20 17 27 Block D Terrace T/H 14
3 2 3
va
Go existing inlet Pa Po
st
Workspace os
t
23 27
P Total units 201
B2 21
Block F Commercial 4400sqm
Block B
SVP SVP
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
32
Block A 17 m 45 Bathroom
4.8sqm
Bathroom
4.8sqm
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
6.3
800 x 1200mm 800 x 1200mm
5
activity space activity space
2 10
SVP SVP
Block C
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
2 Bathroom Bathroom
4.8sqm 4.8sqm
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
15 rea
Ground Floor
Storey Height
yA
31 3 Pla
11
(includes ground) Couryard Terraces
00
59
66
C2 C4 C1 3B 5P - 130sqm
Sketch Section Option 1 First
WATER ROW
WATER ROW
NA
2
Block E
5 7
PI
ER
17
RO
5 3
E PEARCE LANE
AD
AC Total
RR
5 TE
ld ER
PI
nO h NA Flats 159
10
va c
9
21
Go h ur
hC Block D
ris 17 Terrace T/H 41
2
P a 20 10
5
17
PEARCE STREET
an
Total units 200 er
y Gov
Raised deck ur
g
New
E1 Block F Commercial 3500sqm S
rch
1
Chu
9
Raised deck SVP SVP
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
.3m
Bathroom Bathroom
4.8sqm 4.8sqm
6
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
Block C 2
KEY
Institute 796
2 7
nk
892 Pearce Ba
C2 E3 P lay
Area Roof 820
816
830
786
2 5
794
840 to 86
0 nk
790
788 Ba
894
66
59
00 784
Block G
m
m l 6.0
Me
7 2
ar
WATER ROW
W m
NA
Cross Section Sketch Section Option 2 Ground
6.1
Block E E2
PI
er
ER
elt
Sh
17
RO
PEARCE LANE
G2 NOTES -
AD
m
e 779 5.5
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING atu 787
00 St
58
66 801 ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY
ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED
5
WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES
3 NOTIFIED IN WRITING.
10
80
9
21
811
13
PH 7 to
10
819
ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT 1
5
2
ET SITE IS LOCATED.
BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH 15 to
17
RE
PEARCE STREET
an
er
y Gov ST 23
Su
rg New 20
rch
1
25
Chu 29
9
55
H
00
CLIENT - G
EI
RL
2
BU
te
rce Institu
796
nk
PROJECT -
892 Pea Ba Water Row Masterplan
820
816 DRAWING -
830
786
840 to 86
0 794
790 Ba
nk G1 Sketch Layout - Roof
7
784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
6.0m
ml JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
2
Me
ar 20122 JB (SK)007-4
W m
6.1
er
elt
Sh
m
e 779 5.5
atu 787
00 St
58
66 801
803
811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888

13
PH 7 to
819
T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270

EE 15 to
R
ST 23
20
25
29
55
H
00
G
EI
RL
p 12 BU
p 13
Shingle
masonry d
B2
Sloping masonry Mu
Character Zones and Typologies Character Zones and Typologies

SM
Sl
op
ing
Block A Block B Block C Block D Block E Block G
Dashed line
2B 4P 12 2B 4P 18 2B 4P 38 2B 4P 28 2B 4P 45 2B 4P 25
denotes House 2
existing inlet Po
st 1B 2P 21 House 9 House 1
Town House 2
st
Po
2B38 4P Terrace Houses28and Flats 1B472P CornerTotal

Block and 2B 4P Flats
23 27
21
Block C Block
BlockDB Block E Block G Total units 16 Total units 39 Total units units 28 Total units 46 Total units 25
2B 4P 2B 4P 2B 4P 45 17 2B 4P 25 Commercial 700sqm Commercial 1500sqm Commercial 750sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 600sqm
House 9 House 1 (double height) (over 3 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height) Living/Dining
21 sqm
Living/Dining
21 sqm
15 Kitchen
8sqm
Living/Dining
21 sqm
Bathroom
Living/Dining
21 sqm
Bathroom
Kitchen
8sqm
5 sqm 5 sqm
B WM WM B
Total units 47 Total units 28 Total units 46 Total units 25 31

Kitchen
8sqm
Bathroom Bathroom
Kitchen
8sqm
Store
Store
5 sqm 5 sqm
11
Commercial 1500sqm Commercial 750sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 600sqm
Bedroom 1 Bedroom 1
13sqm 13sqm
B WM WM B
(over 3 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)
Store
Store
Bedroom 1 HfVN HfVN Bedroom 1
13sqm 13sqm
75sqm 75sqm
Bedroom 2 TYPE_01 TYPE_01 Bedroom 2
11.5sqm 11.5sqm
Store
Store
HfVN HfVN
Store
Store
WATER ROW
75sqm 75sqm
Store
Store
Shingle Bedroom 2
11.5sqm
TYPE_01 TYPE_01 Bedroom 2
11.5sqm
masonry d
Store
Store
Store
Store
SVP
SM
Store
Store
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
Bathroom
4.8sqm
E
Sl
AC Total
op
R
ER
ing
T
Store
Store
5
R
Store
Store
IE
Store
Store
P Bedroom 2 Bedroom 2
NA Flats 187 11.5sqm TYPE_01 TYPE_01 11.5sqm
Shingle 75sqm 75sqm
Store
Store
masonry d HfVN HfVN
Sloping masonry Mu
Store
Store
Store
Store
Bedroom 2 Bedroom 2
SM
Block D
11.5sqm TYPE_01 TYPE_01 11.5sqm
rf Dashed line
17 27 Terrace T/H 14 W
ha
denotes
Bedroom 1
13sqm
75sqm
HfVN
75sqm
HfVN
Bedroom 1
13sqm
an
Govan
Store
Store
st
Sl
v existing inlet
Go Po
op
Shared Terrace
SVP SVP SVP B WM WM B
Bedroom 1 Bedroom 1
TYPE_01
Workspace
75sqm
ing
Total units 201
13sqm 13sqm
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
HfVN
Bathroom Bathroom
Store
Store
st
Bathroom Bathroom Bathroom Kitchen
5 sqm 5 sqm
Kitchen
Po
4.8sqm 4.8sqm 4.8sqm 8sqm 8sqm
Block F Block A Block B Block C Block D Block E Block G
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
Commercial 4400sqm
Living/Dining
23
B WM WM B
Store
21 27
21 sqm
Store Store
2B 4P 32 12 2B 4P 18 2B 4P 38 2B 4P B 28 2B 4P 45 2B 4P 25
Bathroom Bathroom
Bathroom
45 Block
5 sqm 5 sqm
Kitchen Living/Dining Living/Dining Kitchen
5 sqm
8sqm 21 sqm 21 sqm 8sqm
Store
m
6.3 House 2 1B 2P 21
Dashed line Block A House 9 House 1 17
Block C denotes 2
KEY
Town House 2
Living/Dining
21 sqm
Living/Dining
21 sqm
Bedroom 2
existing inlet st
11.5sqm
Po
ea
Ground Floor
Bedroom 1
Ar
13sqm
y st 15
Kitchen
Pla Po
Total units 16
8sqm
Total units 39 Total units 47 Total units 28 Total units 46 Total units 25
WM
Terrace Terrace Terrace Flats
23 27
21
B
First
Block B Commercial 700sqm Commercial 1500sqm Commercial 750sqm Commercial 850sqm Commercial 600sqm 31
17
First
Terraces 2 storey (double height) (over 3 stories) (double height) (double height) 11
(double height)
15 flat
WATER ROW
NA
Section Option 1
WATER ROW
Block E
PI
ER
31
17
RO
PEARCE LANE 11 NOTES -
AD
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING E
AC
Living/Dining Living/Dining
ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY RR Total 21 sqm 21 sqm
WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES NOTIFIED IN WRITING. 5 TE

10
ld
Shingle
masonry PI ER Kitchen Living/Dining Living/Dining Kitchen
9
d 21 sqm 21 sqm
21
8sqm 8sqm
nO h Mu
Shingle Sloping masonry
Bathroom Bathroom
WATER ROW

NA Flats 187
5 sqm 5 sqm

a SM
ov c B WM WM B
ur
SVP
800 x 700mm
G h Mean High Water Springs

Kitchen
8sqm
Kitchen
8sqm
C
Bathroom Bathroom
10
activity space
Store
Store
5 sqm 5 sqm
Block D
800 x 800mm
ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

activity space
5
ish
Bathroom
Bedroom 1 Bedroom 1
Sl
Terrace T/H 14
13sqm 13sqm
4.8sqm
BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED.
r 20 17
B WM WM B
op
Pa
17
PEARCE STREET
an
Gov
ing
er
y
CE
Store
Store
rg New A Total
Bedroom 1 HfVN HfVN Bedroom 1
Su RR
13sqm 13sqm
75sqm 75sqm
r c h TE Total units 201 TYPE_01 TYPE_01

1
Bedroom 2 Bedroom 2
Ch u 5 11.5sqm 11.5sqm
9
Raised deck
ER
Store
Store
PI Block F Commercial 4400sqm
HfVN HfVN
Store
Store
CLIENT -
NA Flats 187
75sqm 75sqm
Store
Store
Bedroom 2 TYPE_01 TYPE_01 Bedroom 2
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council Raised deck 11.5sqm 11.5sqm
rf Dashed line
Store
Store
ha
Store
Store
m
te nW 6.3 denotes
rce Institu Block D
Store
Store
796
17 Ba
nk
PROJECT -
Terrace T/H
Water Row Masterplan 14 Gov
a
Govan Block C existing inlet 2 Po
st KEY
820
816
SVP SVP SVP
Workspace st Typical Upper
TYPE_01
75sqm
DRAWING -
Po
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
800 x 800mm
activity space
830 ea
HfVN
Total units 201 Ar
Flats
Bathroom Bathroom Bathroom
786 23
Floor
Store
27
4.8sqm 4.8sqm 4.8sqm
794 Sketch Layout - Ground Floor y
21
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
800 x 700mm
activity space
0 Raised deck nk Pla
Living/Dining
Store
840 to 86 Ba
Block F
Store
790
Commercial 4400sqm Block B
Store
21 sqm
Bedroom 2
788 Store Store
32
11.5sqm TYPE_01
Bathroom
DATE - BY - SCALE - 75sqm
Store
Raised deck 784
Block G Block A
5 sqm
17
Store HfVN
Store
May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
m
Store
6.3
Bedroom 2
.0m
Commercial Space
11.5sqm TYPE_01
6 JOB
KEYNO - CHKD - DRWG NO - 9 00 75sqm
Block C
Bedroom 1
65 13sqm HfVN
Commercial Space
2 6
Bedroom 2
Store
11.5sqm
20122 JB (SK)007-1
m 15
First Floor
Bedroom 1
6.1
B WM
rea
Bedroom 1
13sqm
13sqm
yA
Kitchen
Bathroom
er
Store
WATER ROW
8sqm
5 sqm
WM
Kitchen
elt Pla
NA
Commercial Space
8sqm
Sh 31
Block E
B WM
PI
B
ER
Bathroom
m 11 Kitchen
5 sqm
Living/Dining
779 5.5
8sqm 21 sqm
u e
17
RO
tat 787
S PEARCE LANE
Section Option 2 Ground

NOTES -
AD
Living/Dining
21 sqm
Section Option 1 Ground

MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY
WATER ROW
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888 WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES NOTIFIED IN WRITING.
13
10
WATER ROW
7 to
NA
9
21
24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,
Block E
P
T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270 LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND
IE
EE 15 to VENTILATION INFORMATION
R
17 EMAIL INFO@COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK
10
RO
5
PEARCE LANE 20 NOTES - WWW.COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK E
AC
AD
Total
17
PEARCE STREET
an RR
Gov
25
29 DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING ry TE

55
e 5
rg New R
00
l d Su IE
r c h P
nO
1
Ch u NA Flats 187
9
10
va ch
9
Go ur
21
REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING, CLIENT -

Ch
ri s h
20 17 Block D Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council
Terrace T/H 14
10 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT Pa Institute 796
5
nk
PROJECT -
BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED. 892 Pearce Ba
17
PEARCE STREET

an
er
y Gov 820 Total units 201
Su
rg New Raised
830deck
816 DRAWING -
rch 786 Block F Commercial 4400sqm

1
Chu 79
Raised deck4 nk
Sketch Layout - Typical Upper
9
0
840 to 86 790 Ba
CLIENT - 788
894 m DATE - BY - SCALE -
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council 6.3 784
Block G May
KEY 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
Institute nk
796 PROJECT - Block C 6.0
m 2
rce Ba ml JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
830
820
816
DRAWING -
W
ar
Me
6.1
m
Pla
yA
rea First Floor
20122 JB (SK)007-3
786
794 Sketch Layout - First Floor er
840 to 86
0 nk elt
790 Ba Sh
788 DATE - BY - SCALE -
784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
66
59
00
atu
e 787 779 5.5
m
m 00 St
6.0 JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO - 66
58
801
20122 JB (SK)007-2 803
WATER ROW
m MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB
6.1
NA
811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
13
Block E
PI
r
lte 7 to
PH
ER
e
Sh 24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ
819
21
17 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
RO
T 15 to
m EE PEARCE LANE NOTES -
779 5.5 R
AD
e
St
atu 787 ST 23
20 DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING
25
29
55
H WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES NOTIFIED IN WRITING.
10
00
MERCAT BUILDING, 26 GALLOWGATE, GLASGOW, G1 5AB IG
9
21
E REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,
RL
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
13 LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND
7 to BU VENTILATION INFORMATION
1
ET 15 to
2 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
5
E BUILDING STANDARDS FOR COUNTRY IN WHICH SITE IS LOCATED.
17
PEARCE STREET
23 WWW.COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK ry ov an
20
ge
NewG
p 14 p 15
r
Su
25
29 rch
1
Chu
55
9
00
CLIENT -
Institute nk
796 PROJECT -
B3
y
Bd
st
Me
on
an
Fo
C
Hi
h
gh
ex otpa
rg
W
Bu
ate
rS Sh
As isting th ad
pri ing
Fo ng le
ex otpa s
Ca isting th ad
pro phal op
reta ithne op
ted
nd
in ss
ted
U
po t
se
ds
Landscape Strategy
tep
Fo
ex otpa st
As isting th ad
Pro phalt op
MH
WS Bo ot
po
se
d ra
ted
&M
LW
llar
ds ie
Gre
en
roo
mp
/ste
ps
to
tie
S in
f in
ex
co istin
uld g c
be anti 3.8
sh lev
ifte ere
d to d
8
alig look
n w out
Pri ith
va arch
te ite
co ctu
re
urt
ya
rd Fo
? ex otpa
Ca isting th ad Sh Landing
Pro ithne op
ted ing
po ss
se le Stage
d ra
mp
to
tie
in
Sh
bu own
ac t ca on
Do ces n't g Jud
es sib et e's
5.2 le g dow sk
0 w rad n etc
ork ien that h a
for ts. far s 5.0 Slo
3.
ng
Fo
bu wit 0
ex otpa pin
85
Bu h
isti
ild
as ate
Seating ing
ffe
As isting th ad gm
ex
s?
rp
v
area Fo
ne pri
Fo lan Ca otpa pro phalt op
Ca otpa tin ted as
ith th
ith th po
ss
g/
on
Ca otpa
ith th pri ne ad se
ne ad va ss o ds
ss o te as pted tep ry
Fo
as pted ex s to
ex isti
isti ng tie
Riv
ng
ng Pri in
va
isti
as ate
te
ex
er
co
4.
v
urt
ne pri
3.8
90
ya
ith th
rd
ss
8
Cly
?
Ca otpa
Fo
Play
Seating
de
area
3.8
5
5.
Gre
95
0
en 6.1 5
663
38
roo
f
Gr 6.2 0
6.4 5
A
Fo ee 6.5 0
6.7 5
6.8 0
Ca otpa
ith th
ne ad nr 7.0
662
Seating
area
ss o
as pted
ex
isti oo 4.9
f
LANDSCAPE APPROACH
ng
0
A
Bu
ffe
rp Bu
lan ffe
tin rp
g/ Fo lan
pri
va
te Ca otpa tin
g/
ith th
661 ne ad pri
va
SITE ANALYSIS
Ro ss o te Event space
as pted
7.
a
ad d u
op sin ex
0
ted g isti
0
red ng
gra Gre
Fo yg
Ca otpa nit ran

ith th ea
ne pri se ite
Ro ss v xis Co
gra ad u as ate tin as ntin
660 Growing flu nite sing ex
isti
g in ued
ex 0
ad sh k as red isti red 7.0 5
A spaces ng
Wider Context
op erb exis ng gra 6.8 0
ted s/ tin roa nit 6.7 5
g d e ca
co scad
5.9 6.5 0
15 nsta ing 5 6.4 5
6.2 0
0m nt wa 6.1 5
W m wa ter
Relationship to Govan Road

a 5.9
Re ter ter
659 Su ces featu lev
el
bu rfac sed re
A formt va e co in su
ri
slig er s ntin rfac
e
Views
htl slip in fi uou e
y d w ns s
25 ish ay ih to
ed ou
tln
e
East-West Connection
1:
4.90
21
Existing grass
to be retained/
reinstated as buffer
ma 5
Options Bridge Connections

to existing development 6.8
so
Pro nry
f
roo
ad pos
As opte ed
en
6.
Materials
ph d
Gre
alt roa
5 0
d
pri g &
l
ne
te
th ntin
va
an
0
17 6.7
tpa pla
ch
g
of
foo ffer
n
isti
as ate
ing
Bu
Bu
Mud
ex
ss
v
ne pri
Sloping
Cro
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT
ith th
ffe
ss
21
Ca otpa
el
nn
rp
Fo
ha
rc
5 5
Bio SM
Fo 6.5 4.6
4.90
cto
ce 15
lan
lle
ll T 23
min asu on
21
Post
o
red eed
Co
ree
roa wit res
c f
me ucti
5
d tb h o
tin
s 5.9 0
Ca tpa
Sp
Ex 5.8 5
PE 5.6
Ad istin
as opte g ro AR
i thn th g/ 0
5.5 5
Tying into the wider context

Pe
arc
ph
alt d
ad
CE ma pr 5.3 0
5.2 5
es ado
5.0 0
iva
g
LA
17
tin
so 4.9
10
e In
rb
Ro
n
NE 11 nry 5
va pla
ke
4.7
red
stit 27 s p te Event space

nd
pri ffer
ha
te
/up ide
a a t
sta
rs
Bu
5
ute Ex
s e ed
flu m w
4.8 ad
5.0
6.
ad d u
do
to istin Fo 0
Ro
4.9
- Views
ET
0
0
rev be w g ro Ca otpa
9
0 5
ate
5.2
sh
70
0
a 6.4 4.6
ith th
Cu ersin ide d
op Mudsi 4.
ne
xis
RE
ne pri
e
rre g ned
str deli
ss v
lan
ntl to as ate 5
ted ng
yc .6
cle
e
ST
all ex
ian
l4
ob
tin
Pe ld b
ow isti oo 4.75
- East-West Connection
Cy
ble n p
s/ for g Post of r 5
u
m ate 4.6
de
Sloping
co
pa
red g
CE
reta rkin tto f w

in Bo p o 0
an g/ 4.9
To
Gr
AR
de 5
xte 4.7
gra - Materials
nd
Fo ey
PE
Ca otpa
6.2
14 nit gra
31 37 ith th ea
se nit
e
- Bridge Connection
ne pr Co
5.8
xis
9
ss iva 5
as ntin
W
Post
83
a t tin
RO
e 5.0
0
Site Layout
0 6.1 ol 0
private
s g in ued
po 5.2
of r
ER
ex m ate
5
0
gardens tto f w
5 SM 5.5
Bo p o
ex
18
5
AT
To
ist ist red

4.6
W
ing
0
Ex Asphalt footpath 5.2
foo istin
5
5.3
ad tpa g adopted
ing g
1
82 Ca opte th
1:
- Parks and Squares
6.1m
roa rani
Ex
0 ith d a istin
21
ne
ss re dop g ro Fo
d g ted ad Ca otpa
Bank
d te
ran
ca
ite ith th
ne pri
- Streetscapes
Ex ss v
as ate Post
foo istin NAPIER TERRACE
co scad
Co
81 ad tpa g red ntin
ex
isti
5
5.3
6 Ca opte th To gra uatio
ng ol 0
po 5.5
of r
ith d
ne be nit n
ad e p of
5.8 m ate
- Adopted/Non-adopted
tto f w
15 nsta ing
ss op rop
ted os
0 5
0
5.8 .65 Bo p o
5.9 5 .50 To
ed 5
Ex
0m nt wa
- Circulation
ad istin
5.
red opte g ro
W
2
m wa ter
0
gra d ad
Re ater
nit
e
2
ter 0
- Water
.2
0 5
5.5
Su ces featu lev

el
bu rfac sed re - Planting Strategy
1:
78 El Sub Sta
21
7
for t va e co in su 5.5
0
slig mer ries ntin rfac

6.0m 5
New 5.9
5.
Gova
NAPIER ROAD
htl slip in fi uou e

0
70
5.8
n Play Area
Chur
ch y d w ns s
1:
5.85
ish ay ih t
36
10 10
oo
79
6 ed 5.8
0
utl
79
n
4
e
79
5
Existing grass
p 16 to be retained/ p 17
reinstated as buffer
to existing development
B3
Landscape Approach Relationship to Govan Road
SITE ANALYSIS Of equal importance is the relationship between Water Row and Govan Road.
A series of improvements to Govan Road has been made over recent years including
Works to Water Row in upgrades to the subway station and its public realm, upgrades to the square in front of
Wider Context line with completed im-
provements as part of New Govan Church and Water Row to itself.
proposed develoment
The site is located at the historic heart of Govan immediately to the west of the highly
significant but now lost Doomster Hill. With the new link to Riverside and the proposed development around Water Row the
stretch between the entrance to Govan Old and Govan Cross has the potential to once
Site
Govan Road, with High Street amenities, the subway station and a bus terminal are again become the heart of Govan.
located immediately to the South of Water Row. On the it’s western edge the site is bound
by the historic wall of Govan Old Cemetery with the prominent outline Govan Old Parish This aspiration should be reflected in the public realm. The new Water Row proposals
Church at it’s centre. The site also offers a panoramic view to the recently built Riverside should continue to build as well as further works to Govan Road should continue on the
Museum and the Tall Ship on the North banks of the Clyde. already completed works. The paved surface should extend across the road linking the
Govan Old
entrance of Govan Old, the Pearce Institute including the Pearce Statue, connecting
Doomster Hill
The Riverside Museum currently has an insular feel to it as the A814 Clyde Motorway and further works
Govan New Church and the subway station. This would also reduce speed, prioritise
buffer planting to the adjoining railroad physically and visually disconnects the site from proposed to pedestrian movements and create and attractive High Street character.
Govan Road
Glasgow’s West End and Partick. To the south and west the Clyde and the Kelvin River
Roy map 1745 currently increase the physical isolation.
It has however very a strong visual connection to Govan and Clyde Walkway. The City
GlasGow west end Deal proposals to create a physical link between Govan and Riverside Museum will
PArticK
provide Riverside with a vital connection to it’s surrounding areas. Vise versa the bridge
will help to activate Water Row, increase movement and bring visitors to Govan. surrounding ri
ve
Views
landmarks r
cl
yd river-
e
Water Row provides landmark view in all directions giving it an atmosphere of place well
viewpoint side
The design of the bridge and it’s landing on the Water Row side is therefore of up-most
importance. The landing should be accessible, well integrated and assist with place-
views
anchored in its surroundings.
r
a
il
w
making.
a
y
Govan old
a8
Govan old
church
Any new development should ensure that keys views are retained and enhanced rooting
bA
14 rie
church
r
m r
the development in its place, enabling quick orientation and easy navigation.
ot
ri
or
ve
r
w
cl
ay
yd river-
e side
w
br
id
Ge
pearce
Key views include:
ne
- Govan Old
Govan
institute listed
old Govan
buildinG
church
- Riverside Museum and The Tall Ship
new
site church
- Views to Listed Buildings along Govan Road such as the category A Listed corner
building
Govan
shoppinG
centre
Govan
subway Go
va
n
ro
ad
p 18 p 19
B3
East-West Connection existing landscape Options for Bridge Connection

Option A
Bridge
Riverside
North-South level
access
ri
ve
r
Currently the Clyde Walkway provides a good and barrier-free east-west connection along Matching landings
riverside public
ri
v
Of equal importance to the flow of movement is the sequence of the journey across the
cl
Matchting
er
Landings
east-West level
access
yd
e the River Clyde. There is however no North-South connection spanning across the river realm
Water row public
cl
yd
e
bridge and the integration of landing into the surrounding landscape.
as yet. The new bridge will address that and provide a much needed link.
Stepped access realm
Possible options are:

The new connection should be accessible to people of all ages and abilities and suitable
for travel on foot as well as bike. a) A bridge with matching landings either side irrespective of the adjacent landscape
To achieve the best possible flow it is critical that the new bridge ties in at the correct level b) A bridge with matching landscape and integrated landings either side.
and that east and west movements don’t obstruct or block each other. The design team Option B In reality that would mean introducing Riverside material palette along Water Row
has look at varies options with the bridge landing on the higher level allowing for smooth Bridge
as Riverside landscape is completed
integrated landing
existing landscape
North-South flow. riverside matched at
Water row
existing Water row Water Row
public realm
c) A bridge with landings integrated into respective landscapes either side of the
The East-West route could either wrap around the foot of the bridge (upper diagram) or Option c
Bridge
River
dive below the bridge (lower diagram, less favoured by LES). integrated landing
riverside
integrated landing
Water row The aim is to create a sequence that despite unavoidable changes in surface finish feels
coherent, comfortable and easy to navigate.
existing Water row
public realm
Option A: Matching Landings
existing landscape existing landscape

Option A
Riverside Option A Riverside
Bridge Bridge
Matching landings Matching landings
ri ri
riverside public ve riverside public ve
realm r realm r
cl cl
Water row public yd Water row public yd
ri realm e realm e
North-South level ve
access r
cl
east-West level yd
e
access
Stepped access
Option B Option B
Bridge
Bridge
integrated landing
landing embedded into
integrated landing
riverside matched at riverside matched at
Water row
respective landscape
Water row
existing Water row existing Water row
public realm
public realm
Option c
Option c
Bridge
Bridge
integrated landing
integrated landing
riverside existing landscape riverside
integrated landing
existing landscape
integrated landing
Water row Water Row Water row
Water Row
existing Water row
existing Water row
public realm
public realm
Option B: Matching Landscapes

Option C: Landings embedded into respective landscapes
p 20 p 21
B3
Materials LANDSCAPE CONCEPT

Materials
along
ri
v eClyde Walkwey-
The existing material palette is incoherent and confusing and should be simplified to ri
WIDER CONTEXT
ve
increase legibility and ease of orientation.
r r
caithness
West ofcWater
ly
de Row surrounding
landmarks
cl
yd
e river-
red Granite
viewpoint
side
Views
concrete
The Clyde Walkway from east to west features a combination of resin-bound gravel and
cobbles which stop abruptly at the height of Govan Pier where the surface then changes The proposed layout ensures that all key views are retained. Roads are aligned and
Asphalt views
concrete Setts
Materials along
Clyde Walkway to precast concrete slabs. This is followed by a short section of red granite setts at the govan old buildings arranged to reinforce and frame these views. Trees have been carefully
resin Bound
East of church
bottom of Water Row. The only recently installed additional section of the Clyde Walkway positioned to not obstruct key views.
Aggregate
cobbles
Water Row
to the west of Water Row features asphalt with some buff Caithness insertions.
ri
ve
r
Within a 500m stretch of the Riverside walkway 5 different materials are featured instead
of preferrably one continuous material, which could provide a guidance and orientation
cl
caithness Water Row yd
e
red Granite
and a coherent material language. Any new proposal should at the very minimum avoid listed
building
adding further materials and at best try to reduce the already overwhelming variety of
concrete
Asphalt
concrete Setts different types of materials as well as the range of colours and sizes etc.
resin Bound
Aggregate
cobbles
The North- West connection, which currently stops short at Govan landing is much more
coherent featuring only two main materials: Red granite setts for areas of vehicular
Materials along existing East-West Route
overrun and buff Caithness slabs for pedestrian areas.
East West Connection

ri
ve
r
cl
yd
caithness e ri
ve
r
The proposed layout allows continuous, uninterrupted, barrier-free travelling from Govan
red Granite cl
concrete
G o va n
WorK
yd
e Road to Riverside.
S Pa c e S
Asphalt
The proposed layout also provides barrier-free routes east to west hugging a reinstated
Step free dda
concrete Setts compliant
Step free dda Govan old
resin Bound
Aggregate
compliant
Stepped access
church
version of the old Govan dock and weaving through the new development down to the
Clyde again. This route also provides barrier-free/cycle-friendly access to Govan Old and
cobbles
dda compliant route
continues towards
Govan old
the new Govan Workspaces.
ri
ve
r
cl
yd
caithness e
ri
ve
red Granite r
cl
yd
concrete G o va n e
WorK
Asphalt S Pa c e S
concrete Setts Step free dda

compliant
Step free dda Govan old
resin Bound
compliant church
Aggregate
cobbles Stepped access
dda compliant route
continues towards
Govan old
Materials along existing North-South Route
p 22 p 23
B3
ri
ve
r
cl Materials Bridge Connection
yd
e
Primary Materials The proposed material palette aims to simplify the existing extensive variations in The preferred option for the bridge landing is to integrate the landings into their respective
existing red Granite
materials. ri
ve ri
ve
landscapes either side.
Proposed red r r
cl cl
Granite yd yd
e e
With the new bridge creating a critical and key connection linking the Riverside to Govan
Proposed red
Granite (within
bridge boundary)
The levels along the Water Row site are so complex that matching landings are not an
existing caithness the north-west route takes priority. The red granite setts introduced to Water Row as part options.
Proposed caithness of an earlier improvement scheme will continue around the foot of the landing creating a
coherent, well integrated landing point. The material of the bridge itself and its surfacing Matching the landscapes either side is also problematic due to the high variety of existing
Secondary Materials
existing cobbles ri
ve are still unknown to the design team and there is some flexibility with regards to colour/ finishes at Water Row side. Adding yet another material would make the journey across
r
Proposed cobbles cl
yd finish of the surface. However the design team proposes that the surface on the landing the river too busy and confusing.
e
existing Asphalt continues in material and size of setts to create a sense of continuity.
Proposed Asphalt Primary Materials
The most sensible solutions seems to be to integrate the landings not their respective
existing resin
Bound Aggregate Proposed red
The east-west route is more complicated due to the variety of existing materials and the integrated landing
integrated landing
surroundings. For the Water Row end that means a sequence of terraces and steps that
Proposed resin
Bound Aggregate
Granite
Proposed red limited remit to adjust these. However as works will be required to the bottom the landing Water row
integrated landing
Water row
integrated landing
negotiates the complex levels between the Clyde Walkway and the required, much higher
along Govan Pier the opportunity should be taken to replace the concrete flags and levels for development.
Granite (within proposal Water row
proposal Water row
bridge boundary) integrated landing
integrated landing
riverside
existing caithness
extend the material palette used along the eastern section. Bridge
riverside
Bridge
Proposed caithness
A water feature at the bottom of the steps outlines the line of the historic slip way, but
Proposed Materials within development including North-West link
Secondary Materials
The proposed new and more logical material sequence would be as followed: more importantly creates and attractive public space.
existing cobbles
North-South: Red granite setts along Water Row, granite setts of same size at landing
Proposed cobbles
ri
ve
r
existing Asphalt cl
yd
Proposed Asphalt
e
existing resin
Area adjusted to
r
East -West:
match remainder of ieastern
ve
East of Water Row/bridge landing the existing and dominating combination of resin-bound
Primary Materials
Bound Aggregate r
existing red Granite cl
Proposed resin pathway system yd
Proposed red
Granite
Bound Aggregate e
gravel and cobbles should be continued up to the bridge landing,
Proposed red
Granite (within
Primary Materials West of Water Row/Bridge landing the existing combination of asphalt and buff Caithness
bridge boundary)
existing caithness
should be retained and extended if required.
Proposed red
Granite
Proposed caithness Proposed red
Granite (within
bridge boundary)
Water Row and the bridge landing provide a logical break.
Secondary Materials
existing cobbles
existing caithness
Proposed caithness
Detailed plan landing
still to come
Proposed cobbles
existing Asphalt
Secondary Materials
Proposed Asphalt existing cobbles
existing resin Proposed cobbles

Bound Aggregate
existing Asphalt
Proposed resin
Bound Aggregate
Proposed Asphalt
existing resin
Bound Aggregate
Proposed resin
Bound Aggregate
Proposed Materials within development including North-West link
p 24 p 25
B3
ri ri
ve ve
r r
cl cl
yd yd
e e
Public square at bridge SITE LAYOUT Streetscapes
landing
Parks and Squares The new development provides a variety of streetscapes from
- Generous, open and inviting spaces such as along Water Row to
a
The proposals include a series of squares and parks providing a high quality public realm 2 - Green and leafy streets along the park and Pearce Road to
for future residents and empolyees as well as visitors to the Riverside Museum. - Protected and intimate residential lanes
3
b
c The squares and plaza are located along Water Row. The Square in front of New Govan
Church is to be retained as existing but will get framed by a new building along its 4
northern edge providing much needed protection and enclosure.

Squares Squares 1
Parks The landing of the bridge provides a great opportunity for more extended public realm Parks
Streetscapes
spanning different levels: Streetscapes
a) Steps with a light tree cover overlooking the River

Existing square with
enclosed by new building b) Cascading shallow pools of water outlining the old slipway providing great views
to north
to Riverside. This area also provides space for any faires, carousels, show
Existing and proposed squares
entertainment along Govan Pier.
ri
ve Types of Streetscapes
r
cl
yd
e
c) The third section of that public space is the transitional space opening up views to
Riverside well at the same time guiding pedestrians/cyclists either up the bridge or
down to the water. The foot print of the old slip ways is made visible through subtle
changes in surface finish i.e. red granite setts might be polished or textured. The
surface will also be slightly dished and include flush installed water fountains.
Park
The two softer open spaces are to either side of the development.
A small park along eastern edge of Govan Old cemetery providing opportunities for play
and recreation and extended green space to the east of the new development continuing
the language of green islands and providing a buffer to the existing houses.
green space re-
Squares lating to existing
houses
Parks
Streetscapes
Proposed Greenspaces
p 26 p 27
B3
Adopted / Non-adapted Circulation

ri
ve
r
cl
yd
e Areas of adoption require further discussion and agreement with Glasgow City Council. Vehicular
ri
However the diagram above indicates a starting point for discussion: route through
ve
r
cl
development yd
e
Thervehicular routes through the development can be split into several categories:
Access for events/ iv
The blocks of development and areas within their immediate vicinity such as buffer markets route through - Circular
e r vehicular route to access new buildings and businesses
c
planting should be maintained by GHA. Access to clyde
walkway
development - Vehicularlyroute
d e allowing access to Govan Old and Govan workspace via site
Access to Govan
Access for events/
markets
- Vehicular access across public space to Govan Pier for events.
workspace
Areas for public use and these which are important for wider circulation and connection Access to clyde This is not a formal road, but a shared surface with vehicular make-up allowing for
such as the east-west and north-south routes moving through the development Pedestrian ddA
walkway
occasional vehicular access and when required
Access to Govan
connecting neighbourhoods with each other and Govan to wider City should be adopted. compliant workspace - Vehicular access to Western section of Clyde Walkway is proposed via Wanlock Street
This includes roads, squares and bridge landing. cycle route
Pedestrian steps
Pedestrian ddA
Highlighted Areas
maintained by GHA compliant
cycle route
Pedestrian steps
Vehicular routes
Proposed areas to be maintained by GHA
ri
route through
ve
r Pedestrian:
cl
development yd
Access for events/
e
markets DDA compliant accessible routes have been integrated to allow for barrier-free movement
Access to clyde
walkway north-south
r as well as east-west.
iv
Access to Govan route through
er
workspace ly c
development
The north-south
d e routes goes along Water Row with an accessible gradient transitioning
Access for events/
Pedestrian ddA markets up to the new bridge.
compliant Access to clyde
walkway
cycle route
Access to Govan
The east-west route moves around the cascading water-feature linking the eastern
Pedestrian steps workspace section of the Clyde Walkway to Water Row and providing accessible access to the bridge
as well as the western section of the Clyde Walkway, Govan Old and the future Govan
Pedestrian ddA Workspace.
compliant
cycle route A shorter alternative is a direct, but stepped access up to the bridge.
Pedestrian steps
Pedestrian routes
p 28 p 29
B3
ri
ve ri
r ve
cl r
yd cl
ures e yd
Framework Trees e
Water Planting
Feature Trees
Small Scale Trees
Cascading water feature
As the name suggests water is a critical and defining element of Water Row. Trees
The design team therefore proposes to reconnect the Govan, its people and visitors to the Buffer Planting
Water in safe and manageable ways offering a variety of different water spaces: Most of the existing planting comprising of self-seeded trees and shrubs will have to be
cleared due to the extent of development and required changes in level.
At the top of Water Row the Design team hopes to collect surface water in small
channels, which can also be used to float paper boats or engage children in other ways. The proposed tree planting provides as strong framework of suitable street trees in road
Water
sections preferably Lime trees to tie in with the wider planting strategy of Govan.
fountains
Where the road opens up to reveal views of Water Row water fountains installed flush in a
slightly dished surface can be switched on sunny and hot summer days to provide cooling Feature trees located in the park or in small groups in suitable areas could be Horse
and play opportunities to children. Chestnuts
r (in the park) or Oaks (hard surfaced areas)
iv
er
ly c
Water Finally the bridge landing offers great potential for an integrated landscape utilising the Framework Trees
Callery Pear,
d e a smaller tree, which is widely used throughout Govan is proposed to add
Channel
quite dramatic changes in level to provide a cascading water feature with a max constant interest and introduce different scales of planting.
Feature Trees
water level of 150mm per basin inviting both adults and children reconnect to the Water
Small Scale Trees
that once defined Water Row in a safe and managed way. Sculptural trees and shrubs such as Pine or Amelanchier are proposed for the steps
Buffer Planting
ri
around the cafe softening the appearance without obstructing the views.
Both cascading water feature/basins and water recessed water fountains are based on Tree planting ve
Areas of Water interaction r
cl
the historic slipway striking a balance between historic interpretation and relating to new yd
Framework Trees e
proposals.
Feature Trees
Small Scale Trees
Buffer Planting
Buffer Planting
Buffer planting is proposed around the perimeter of the new buildings to provide privacy
as well as greening streets and adding another scale to the planting strategy.
3D of water feature
Proposed planting should be ever-green (such as Lonicera pileata) to provide an uplifting
as well as precedents experience throughout the year.
still to come
ri
ve
r
cl
yd
Framework Trees e
Feature Trees
Small Scale Trees
Buffer Planting
Shrub planting
p 30 p 31
Gova
n Wh
arf
Mea
n Hig Shin
LEGEND
PROPOSED SURFACE WATER SEWER & MANHOLE
Notes
1. THIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHT, RESERVED AND REMAINS THE
PROPERTY OF G3 CONSULTING ENGINEERS.
B4
hW gle PROPOSED FOUL SEWER & MANHOLE
ater
Spri
ngs 2. THE CONTRACTOR AND HIS SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS ARE
TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND LEVELS ON SITE BEFORE
GOV
DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE WATER MAKING SHOP DRAWINGS OR COMMENCING MANUFACTURE.
WO AN River CONTROL MANHOLE WITH HYDROBRAKE
Clyde
3. DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING, ONLY USE FIGURED DIMENSIONS.
RKS THE CONTRACTOR IS TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE
PAC PROPOSED WET SWALE

ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING
PRIOR TO WORK COMMENCING. WHERE REQUIRED THIS
E
Engineering Drawings
DRAWING TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL RELEVANT
DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
CONNECTION TO SWALE
4. ALL WORK TO CONFORM TO THE RELEVANT BRITISH STANDARDS.
Shin
gle
PROPOSED ATTENUATION STORAGE TANK
BLO
ry
ason
CK ing m
A Slop
DENOTES AREA OF PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED POROUS PAVING
* PROPOSED CONNECTION TO EXISTING SEWER
DIA mm
CSO CO
EXISTING SURFACE WATER SEWER & MANHOLE
ER
EXS
0
120
.
SEW
EXISTING FOUL SEWER & MANHOLE
BLO EX5811 EXISTING COMBINED SEWER & MANHOLE

CK CL4.98
n Old B IL0.90
Gova
EX
DI S 5
h EX5818
h C hurc CL4.90 SE A. C 25
W O mm
Paris
N o te s
IL3.32 ER S
W 1. THIS DRAWING IS COPYRIGHT, RESERVED AND REMAINS THE
THIS BLOCK MAY PROPERTY OF SCOTT BENNETT ASSOCIATES.
NEED TO BE DELETED
2. THE CONTRACTOR AND HIS SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS ARE
CONSTRAINTS TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND LEVELS ON SITE BEFORE
MAKING SHOP DRAWINGS OR COMMENCING MANUFACTURE.
(CONSTRUCTED OVER EX5804 3. DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING, ONLY USE FIGURED DIMENSIONS.
A 'NO BUILD ZONE') CL5.02 onry

mas SUBWAY TUNNEL
THE CONTRACTOR IS TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE
ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING
MAJOR DIVERSION IL2.06 LOCATION WITH 5m

PRIOR TO WORK COMMENCING. WHERE REQUIRED THIS
DRAWING TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL RELEVANT
DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
EXCLUSION ZONE (FROM
REQUIRED 4. ALL WORK TO CONFORM TO THE RELEVANT BRITISH STANDARDS.
TUNNEL FACE). THIS WILL
EX5810 Mud IMPACT ON BUILDING
CL5.27 LOCATIONS AND TYPE OF
g
ILTBC EX5803 SM
FOUNDATIONS. EARLY SPT
in
CL5.14 CONSULTATION WILL BE
Slop
IL2.55 REQUIRED.
EX5816 EX5819
CL5.00 CL4.95
VIRGIN MEDIA PLANS HAVE
IL1.55 IL3.14
NOT BEEN RECEIVED AS
17
EXS
Post YET.
VC F
375m WER
21
m DIA
23
100m WER
.
SE DIA
WS
SE
WE A.
R
SE m DI
WE
R
CO mm
E
m DIA
W
VC S 300
CS 50m
S
15 27
EXS
CO
.
CO S 10
O
EX
Post
EX
EX5801
CL5.91 Legend
EX5815 A Schematic drainage layout updated inline MMQ 09.07.18
m DIA. IL2.42 11
CL5.60 EXS 300m with revised Architect's site plan
WER MASTERPLAN BOUNDARY
BLO IL4.36 CO FW SE EX5802 THIS BLOCK MAY NEED 37
Post
CK EX5809 CLTBC TO BE DELETED
rev description by chkd date
C EX4813
CLTBC ILTBC (CONSTRUCTED OVER A
INDICATIVE PHASE 1 BOUNDARY
ILTBC 'NO BUILD ZONE') MAJOR 5m exclusion zone to
18
CL5.75 DOCQUET
IL2.03 DIVERSION REQUIRED 31 We hereby certify this is a true and fair copy of the plan/drawing
route of subway tunnel
and for Vodafone Fibre 5m exclusion for existing
BLO referred to in the Application.
Optic Cable. retaining wall. 300mm DIAMETER FOUL SEWER
CK EX5702
BLO
EX4801
EX4809 CL5.43 D CL5.97
IL4.26
Dated Signed
375mm SURFACE WATER SEWER
CL5.95 IL1.50
6.3m
CK F
IL4.51
*
client
EX4721 VODAFONE FIBRE OPTIC
EX4804
CLTBC
* CL6.27
EX4803 IL1.88 GOVAN HOUSING 6m STAND OFF SURFACE WATER
CL6.23 5
ER IA.
ASSOCIATION
ILTBC SEWER OR DIVERSION
IL1.45
SEW m D
EX5704 E 6m STAND OFF FOUL WATER

SW 225m
PEA CLTBC RAC

892 RCE EX5708 TER SEWER OR DIVERSION
LAN ILTBC CL5.28 IER
NAP
EET
E
EXS
21
IL3.60 project
5m STAND OFF EXISTING
EX4712
STR
EX5705 RETAINING WALL

CL6.22
10
CLTBC
IL4.81 b Sta RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
RCE
ILTBC
DIA
. El Su 5m EXCLUSION ZONE TO OUTER
mm
WATER ROW
894
.
CO S 0mm DIA
150
17
WALL OF SUBWAY TUNNEL

PEA
EXS EWER 6m exclusion zone for

S
FW
GOVAN
EX4713 Scottish Water Sewers STAND OFF FOR VODAFONE
R
BLO
EWE
EX3705 6m exclusion zone for FIBRE OPTIC CABLE

CL6.15
Pearce CK
90
WER .
9
IA
CLTBC Scottish Water Sewers COINCIDENTAL WITH SUBWAY

Institute IL4.09
E EXIC
VC C 00mm D
EXS
ILTBC 2 TUNNEL EXCLUSION.

9
O SE
DIA 1000mm
EXIC
title
SEW BR CO
3
EXS
10
l 840 to
Mem 860 EXIC
ER
War
SCHEMATIC DRAINAGE
5
EX3714
EXS
.
CLTBC
LAYOUT
ROW
ILTBC Area
ery Play
Surg
1
TER
830
WA
EXIC EXIC EX5721

820
Bank CL6.25
A FIBRE OPTIC CABLE LOCATION CORRECTED MP IL 18/04/18
EXS 225mm DIA.

IL3.89 re v d e sc rip tio n b y c h kd d a te
803 816 *
EX4708
HIGHLIGHTED AREA
SW SEWER
D OC QUET
W e h e re b y c e rtify th is is a tru e a n d fa ir c o p y o f th e p la n /d ra w in g
819
801
EX4701 INDICATES EXTENT OF EX5716 re fe rre d to in th e Ap p lic a tio n .
811
EX3716 CL6.29
6.1mCLTBC CL6.05 CL6.11 EXISTING SURFACE
D a te d Sig n e d
e IL1.91 IL3.76
PH Statu IL0.73 EX4707 IL2.89 WATER SEWER THAT c lie n t
CLTBC MAY REQUIRE TO BE New Govan GOVAN

IL0.73 DIVERTED EX5715 11
NAPIER ROAD
EXS HOUSING ASSOCIATION
13 Church CL6.13
DIA. C 50mm EX4702
O SE CL5.89 IL3.85
WER
EET IL0.73
p ro je c t
STR
EX 79 WATER ROW,
IGH 6.0m BR S 10
6
15 to 21 7 to 13
MASTERPLAN
23
RLE EX CO 50m
BU SE m D
29
BR S 10
7
78
2 WE IA 79
CO 5 m R . 4
SE m D Orion House, 7 Robroyston Oval, Nova Business Park, Glasgow, G33 1AP
title
WE IA. 79
27 R 0 T: 0141-558-3255, E: enquiries@g3eng.co.uk
78 78 CONSTRAINTS PLAN
8 Bank 6
43 Building Standards
ace Approved Certifier
FQM FQM
78
Facilitators Quality Management Facilitators Quality Management
ISO 9001:2008 ISO 14001:2004

4 Member Firm
The Association of
The Scottish
15 Consulting Engineers REGISTERED FIRM REGISTERED FIRM
Government
779
BLO Sc o tt B e n n e tt Asso c ia te s
CK
c o n su ltin g c ivil a n d stru c tu ra l e n g in e e rs
G
Orio n Ho u se , 7 Ro b ro ysto n Ova l Offic e s a lso a t
7
N o va B u sin e ss Pa rk D u n fe rm lin e
drawn checked date

Gla sg o w , G3 3 1 AP
T: 0 1 4 1 - 5 5 8 - 3 2 5 5
er ACE
Shelt
E: e n q u irie s@sb a g 2 .c o m
R PL
5
79 ace
FQM FQM
IE
NAP IMF RS APR 18
Facilitators Quality Mamagement Facilitators Quality Mamagement
Member Firm ISO 9001:2008 ISO 14001:2004

The Association of
Consulting Engineers INVESTOR IN PEOPLE constructionline REGISTERED FIRM REGISTERED FIRM
scales 1:500 sheet size A1 issu e sta tu s
Revision
5.5m Drawing
Number J3916-sk001 A
d ra w n
MP
c h e c ke d
IL
d a te
29/01/18
entre
sc a le s 1:500 sh e e t size A0
ing C
Re visio n
p
D ra w in g
Shop
N um b er J3916-3010 A
p 32 p 33
B4
p 34 p 35
B4
p 36 p 37
2nd Floor 2nd Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 G2
75m2 75m2 75m
1st Floor
Commercial 150sqm Commercial 200sqm
type A 2B 4P
Commercial 200sqm
Comm
Ground Floor 1st Floor 650 75m2 100s
Commercial 150sqm
type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 150
Block A - Section 2 Block B units 21 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Block B commercial 650 type A 2B 4P
B5
2nd Floor 4
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2
1st Floor 4
75m2 75m2 126m2 75m2 75m2 Block E - Section 1
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 4
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 6th Floor 2 Block G - Section 2 type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P

5th Floor 2
7th Floor 2 75m2 75m2
Block A units 12 2 2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
4th Floor 2
2 75m2 75m2
6th Floor type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2
3rd Floor 2 Refer to E2
Block B - Section 1 75m2 294m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
5th Floor 2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
2nd Floor 2 75m2 75m2
75m2 75m2
5 type A 2B 4P typetype A 2B 4P
A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
5th Floor
1st Floor 4th Floor Commercial Commercial Commercial75m2 75m275m2 75m2
4th Floor 4 75sqm 75sqm type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
150sqm type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Ground Floor 3rd Floor 5 450
75m2
4
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 294m2 75m2
3rd Floor
Area schedules
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 5 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
2nd Floor 4
75m2 75m2 210 m2 75m2 75m2 2nd Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Block E - Section 2
3 type A 2B 4P
1st Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 Commercial
1st 3
Floor ROW MASTERPLAN
WATER
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 100sqm type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Commercial type A 2B 4P
Commercial 75m2
3 100 4 150sqm
Ground Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 6th Floor Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow
75m2 City Council 75m2 75m2 75m2 250sqm type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 3 400
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2
5th Floor 4
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
4th Floor 4 Block F units 27 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Block B -
Block F commercial Flat Flat Flat
type A 2BTerrace Town.H
Section 2 Stair Core Stair Core
4P type550
A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
type B 1B 2P 3rd Floor 4 Refer to E3
9th Floor 1
55m2 Type A Type B C Type D 294m2
Type75m2 Type E 75m2
Comm. 75m2 294m2 75m2
type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P 4
8th Floor 1 2
55m2 69m2 69m2
2nd Floor 2B 4P 1B 2P 2B 3P75m2 3B 6P 5B 10P 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P
7th Floor 1 2 type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P
1st Floor Flat Flat Flat Terrace Town.H Commercial
Commercial
Comm. Commercial Commercial type D 3B 6P 75m2
55m2 69m2 69m2

Ground Floor
Block
Blocks A-CA - Section
1 1 66 8
400
1450sqm 11 2 1500
50sqm 150sqm 150sqm 112.5m2 type A 2B 4P
55m2 69m2 69m2 75m2
type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P
1 2
5th Floor 55m2 Stair Core 69m2 69m2 Blocks D-G 93 1 5 2050
420 m2
Block E - Section 3 2nd Floor
55m2 69m2 69m2
1 2 type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P 1st Floor type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type Atype E 5B 10P
2B 4P type E 5B 10P
Refer toA2
3rd Floor 55m2 69m2 69m2 4th Floor 3 type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P
75m2 75m2 75m2 150m2 150m2
1 2 Refer to B1
4P 2 type A 2B24P 112.5m2 112.5m2
2nd Floor 55m2 69m2 69m2
3rd Floor 3 Ground
Total Floor
units 159 8
type A 2B
1475m2 12 75m2 7
type A 2B 4P
type A 2B 4P 75m2
1st Floor Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial 75m2
WATER ROW MASTERPLAN 75 55 69 A 2B
type 112.5
4P 150
type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council 2nd Floor 3
200sqm 200sqm 50sqm 50sqm 50sqm type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 210m2 75m2
Ground Floor 550
WATER ROW MASTERPLAN 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council 1st Floor 3 Total sqm 11925 440 96675m2 1350 75m2 1050 3550 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
Flat
Flat Flat Terrace Town.H Ground Floor 3
75m2 75m2 75m2
Flat Flat Flat Terrace Town.H Type A Type B Type C Type D Type E Comm.
Block B units 18 8 14
Type A Type B Type C Type D Type E Comm. 2B 4P 1B 2P 2B 3P 3B 6P 5B 10P Block E units 45 1
2B 4P 1B 2P 2B 3P 3B 6P 5B 10P
Block B commercial 650
Block E commercial Block A - Section 2 850
Collective Architcture
Block C - Block D - Section 1 Block F 03/07/18
2nd Floor 4
Block A - Section 1 Section 1 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
6th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 1st Floor 4
2nd Floor type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
2nd Floor 75m2 75m2 126m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P 5th Floor 4 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B
type4P type type
A 2BA 4P
2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
1st Floor type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P
type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P Refer toA2 75m2
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
4th Floor 7
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 1st Floor Ground Floor 4 type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P E 5B 10P
75m2
150m2 150m2
112.5m2 112.5m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 150m2 150m2 150m2 150m2 75m2 150m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Ground Floor 2 2 4th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
75m2
3rd Floor 7 Ground Floor 5
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 Stair Core 75m2 75m2 Stair Core 75m2 75m2 Stair Core 75m2 75m2
3rd Floor 4 75m2 75m2 Stair Core Stair Core 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
+ LIFT 294m2 + LIFT 294m2 2nd Floor 7 210 m2 210m2 210m2
2nd Floor 4
type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B Block F units
4P Block A units 5 12 2 2
1st Floor Block F commercial
type A Commercial 75m2
type A 2B 4P Commercial 150sqm Commercial 200sqm Commercial 200sqm type A 2B 4P
2B 4P 650 100sqm
1st Floor 1 75m2 type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P 75m2 type D 3B 6P Ground Floor 75m2
Commercial 150sqm
Block A - Section 2 type A 112.5m2 112.5m2 112.5m2 112.5m2
2B 4P
type A 2B 4P
Block B units 21 Block G - Section 1
2nd Floor 4
type A 2B 4P
75m2
type A 2B 4P
75m2
type A 2B 4P
75m2
type A 2B 4P
75m2
Ground Floor 1 4 150
75m2
75m2
Block B commercial 650 Block B - Section 1
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 6th Floor
1st Floor 4
75m2 75m2 126m2 75m2 75m2
Ground Floor 4
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Block C - Section 2 Block E - Section 1 5th Floor
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 4th Floor
2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 5th Floor
6th Floor 75m2 75m2 3rd Floor Refer to block
Block A units 12 2 2 2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 2nd Floor
4th Floor 4 G2
5th Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 1st Floor type A 2B
75m2 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
Refer to C1 4th Floor 2
75m2 75m2 3rd Floor 4 Commercial 150sqm
type A
Stair Core 150 75m2
type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 75m2
Block B - 2B 4P Commercial 350sqm type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Ground Floor 75m2
Section 1
3rd Floor 2 Refer to E2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
1st Floor 75m2 75m2 294m2 75m2
2nd Floor 4 type A 2B 4P
type A type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 75m2 210 m2 75m2 75m2
Commercial 350sqm 2nd Floor 2
5th Floor Ground Floor
2B 4P
700 75m2 75m2 75m2
3 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
type A 2B 4P
Block G - Section 2 1st Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 Commercial
4th Floor 4 1st Floor Commercial Commercial Commercial 75m2
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 100sqm
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75sqm 75sqm 150sqm type A 2B 4P
7th Floor 2
Ground Floor 3 100
3rd Floor 4
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Block C - Section 3 Ground Floor 450
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
2nd Floor 4
75m2 75m2 210 m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 6th Floor 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 4th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
1st Floor 3
75m2 75m2 75m2 Commercial type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Block E - Section 2 5th Floor 2
75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 100sqm 3rd Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
3 100 5 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 4th Floor
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Block B -
2nd Floor 4 75m2 75m2 Stair Core 75m2 75m2 4
type A + LIFT 210m2
6th Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 5 Section 2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
2B 4P
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 3rd Floor 75m2 75m2 294m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
75m2 5th Floor 4 type B 1B 2P
1st Floor 1 75m2 type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P
Refer to C2
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 5 9th Floor 1 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
type A 112.5m2 112.5m2 112.5m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 2nd Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 210m2 75m2 55m2
75m2
Block B - Section 2 2B 4P
type A 2B 4P
4th Floor 4
75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type
type B 1B
A 2B 4P 2P
type A 2B 4P
type B 1B 2P Ground Floor 1 3 75m2
75m2
type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P 1st Floor 3
8th Floor 1 2 Commercial 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
9th Floor 1
4 Refer to E3 Commercial 150sqm 55m2
55m2 3rd Floor 75m2 294m2 75m2 75m2 294m2 75m2 250sqm type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P Ground Floor 3 400 type B 1B 2P
8th Floor 1 2
55m2 69m2 69m2 Block C - 4
7th Floor 1 2 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
Section 4 2nd Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 55m2
7th Floor 1 2 type A 2B 4P type B 1B 2P
55m2 69m2 69m2 Block F units 27 1 2
1 2 type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P 1st Floor Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial type D 3B 6P 75m2 Block F commercial 6th Floor 550 55m2
6th Floor 55m2 69m2 69m2 50sqm 50sqm 150sqm 150sqm 112.5m2 type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 1 400 type B 1B 2P
1 2 type B 1B 2P type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P 75m2
5th Floor 1 2
Stair Core
5th Floor 55m2 Stair Core 69m2 69m2 Refer to C1 Refer to C3 55m2
1 2 type B 1B 2P 420 m2 type C 2B 3P type C 2B 3P
1st Floor
Flat Flat Flat Terrace Town.H Comm. type B 1B 2P 420 m2
1500 1 2
4th Floor 55m2
type B 1B 2P
69m2
type C 2B 3P
69m2
type C 2B 3P type A type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P
Block E - Section 3
Blocks A-C 66 4th
8 Floor14 11 2
55m2
3rd Floor 1 2 2B 4P 112.5m2 112.5m2
55m2 69m2 69m2
Ground Floor type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type B 1B 2P
2 75m2
4th Floor 3 Blocks D-G 93 3rd Floor 1 5 2050 1 2
2nd Floor 1 2 Refer to B1
55m2 69m2 69m2
75m2 75m2 75m2 55m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type B 1B 2P
3rd Floor 3 1 2 Refer to B1
1st Floor Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial 75m2 Block C units 36 9 75m2 75m2 75m2 2nd Floor 55m2
200sqm 200sqm 50sqm 50sqm 50sqm type A 2B 4P Block C commercial 850 type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Stair Core type A 2B 4P
Ground Floor 550
2nd Floor 3 Total units 159 8 14 12 7
75m2 75m2 75m2 210m2 75m2
Flat Flat Flat Terrace Town.H Comm. type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P 75 1st
55 Floor69 112.5 150 Commercial Commercial Commercial
1st Floor 3
66 8 14 11 2 1500 75m2 75m2 75m2 200sqm 200sqm 50sqm
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Ground Floor 550
3 Total sqm 11925 440 966 1350 1050 3550
Ground Floor 75m2 75m2 75m2
Block B units 18 8 14
Block B commercial 650 66 8 14 11 2 2650 Block E units 45 1
Block E commercial 850
Collective Architcture
Block C - Section 1
03/07/18
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Block F Block B units 18 8 14
6th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P Collective Architcture
2nd Floor
Block B commercial 650
5th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 03/07/18
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P
type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P type E 5B 10P
4th Floor 4 75m2 75m2 75m2 75m2 1st Floor 75m2
150m2 150m2 150m2 150m2 150m2
3rd Floor 4
type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P
Stair Core Stair Core
type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P
Ground Floor 5 type A 2B 4P
75m2 Block C - Section 1
p 38
2nd Floor 4
type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P + LIFT 294m2 + LIFT 294m2 type A 2B
75m2
4P type A 2B
75m2
4P
Block F units 5 6th Floor 4
type A 2B 4P type A 2B 4P p 39
type A
type A 2B 4P
75m2 75m2
Block F commercial
1st Floor 1
2B 4P
type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P type D 3B 6P
75m2
type D 3B 6P
75m2
type A
Commercial 150sqm
112.5m2 112.5m2 112.5m2 112.5m2
5th Floor 4 75m2 75m2
type A 2B 4P
B6
Cost Plan
Water Row, Govan

Preliminary Master Plan Estimated Development Costs
CONTENTS
1.00 INTRODUCTION
2.00 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

WATER ROW, GOVAN
3.00 DEVELOPMENT SOLUTION
4.00 COST COMMENTARY

PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
Appendices
FOR
Appendix 1 - Summary of Estimated Development Costs
JULY 2018
Ref: CMD/KK/DB/2587/Cost Report

July 2018 rev1 Brown + Wallace
p 40 p 41
B6
Water Row, Govan Water Row, Govan

Preliminary Master Plan Estimated Development Costs Preliminary Master Plan Estimated Development Costs
1.00 INTRODUCTION 2.00 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.01 Background 2.01 Synopsis of the Cost Estimate
Brown + Wallace were appointed as part of an experienced design team to undertake an assessment of total development costs associated Brown + Wallace have appraised the initial newbuild proposals, and these are summarised below:-
with proposals for the Water Row site in Govan.
Summary of Estimated Development Costs
Total
At this stage all properties are being developed for the affordable social rented sector and will be to the ‘Glasgow Standard’ incorporating
elements of the 'Gold' Sustainability Standard. Land Acquisition £ 1,193,700
Construction Costs £ 45,855,700
1.02 Remit of the Report Project Team Fees £ 2,533,100
Development Costs £ 639,600
The remit of this report is to ascertain, based on the information currently available, the estimated total development costs for the delivery of Risk Allowance £ 5,042,900
200 residential units:- Inflation Estimate £ -
VAT £ -
159 Nr 2B 4P Flats
8 Nr 1B 2P Flats Estimated Development Costs £ 55,265,000
14 Nr 2B 3P Flats
12 Nr 3B 6P Terrace Houses The above costs are
All construction exclusive
costs of VAT: refer
are exclusive Section 4.10.
of VAT:
7 Nr 5B10P Town Houses
Along with 23 Nr commercial units totalling 3400m2 GiFA, together with associated site development, infrastructure and servicing.
The development is envisaged to be carried out in 4 phases.
1.03 General Scope of Works
The site is relatively flat and typical in nature of Glasgow brownfield sites with made ground, alluvial
silt, groundwater flows, former shipyard buried bases, localised soil industrial contamination and
archaeological considerations.
Piled foundations being the most likely foundation option along with site remediation, gas protection
and flood plain measures.
Ref: CMD/KK/DB/2587/Cost Report Ref: CMD/KK/DB/2587/Cost Report

July 2018 rev1 Brown + Wallace July 2018 rev1 Brown + Wallace
p 42 p 43
B6

2.02 Reflection of Current Market Conditions 3.00 DEVELOPMENT SOLUTION
Anticipated costs reported are based on current pricing levels 3Q 2018 with no future tender price inflation allowances. 3.01 Preliminary Design Solution 3.03 Design Criteria
Whilst current market conditions are still uncertain and unpredictable, a steady increase in output has been recently experienced and is The current solution has been developed by the Design Team All works to be designed to achieve compliance with 2017 Building
expected to continue for the foreseeable future. Published BCIS indices and recent market prices obtained by Brown + Wallace reflect this and follows preliminary discussions with both the Planning & Regulations and will meet the current 'Gold Level' for GCC City
view. Roads Department and takes cognisance of the topography of Development Plan
the site and the likely ground conditions that will be
It is therefore considered appropriate that recognition be given in any future cost estimates to reflect these increases encountered. Where practicable, all dwellings will be designed to comply with the
basic requirements of HfVN: Dwellings in General and Disabled
2.03 Conclusion 3.02 Schedule of Accommodation dwellings will be designed to comply with the basic requirements of
HVN: wheelchair criteria.
Brown + Wallace are satisfied that this Preliminary Masterplan Estimated Development Cost represents a robust assessment of the likely cost of Reference to the table below illustrates the agreed housing mix
the project, reflecting the current status of design development and prevailing market conditions. comprising 200 residential units: It is also envisaged that the project will attain Secured by Design
accreditation.
2B 4P Flats 159
1B 2P Flats 8
2B 3P Flats 14
3B 6P Terrace Houses 12
5B 10P Town Houses 7
Signed: __________________________ ______
203 Nr
for
Commercial Units 23 Nr
Brown + Wallace
22 James Morrison Street Residential and non-residential units are contained within 7
Glasgow blocks ranging from 2-storey terrace houses to 10-storey flats.
G1 5PE
Date: 22 August 2018

p 44 p 45
B6

Schedule of Areas
4.00 COST COMMENTARY 4.03 Statutory Approvals
4.01 Constraints & Limitations a) Planning Consent – no formal application to date c) all principle excavations above ground water level
a) The costs have initially been based upon current pricing b) Engineers Information b) Building Warrant – to current standards (anticipate October d) no requirement for major electrical sub-station works
levels (3Q 2018), with no inflationary allowances. 2018).
J3916-SK 001 Proposed Drainage Layout e) no requirement for major sewer or water diversions
b) It is envisaged that the project will be procured on a c) Roads Construction Consent / Section 56 – no formal
‘traditional’ basis with competitive tenders received from c) Mechanical & Electrical Information application to date. f) minor lowering of existing water mains anticipated
suitably experienced contractors.
No information available at time of report d) Scottish Water approvals – no formal application to date. g) reasonable allowances for archaeological watching briefs
c) Preliminaries are based upon the works being procured in
four phases and exclude any costs that may be attributable d) SAP Strategy This report makes no allowance for any onerous conditions that h) allowance for 600 capping layer below all roads
to further sectional completion of the works. may arise from the above.
Glasgow Standard options and Passivhaus strategy as i) all excavated material suitable for disposal off site as 'inert' waste
d) Preliminaries are based on a typical contract period with outlined in Carbon Futures email 1 June 2018. 4.04 Exclusions from Construction Cost Estimate
normal working hours and no allowance for any acceleration j) no requirement for ground gas preclusion measures
oncosts. e) Topographical Study a) legal, marketing and selling agents fees
k) no requirement for capping layers within gardens
4.02 Drawings & Other Information No information available at time of report b) third party warranties and way-leaves
l) no requirement for works to existing unnamed burn adjacent to the
Costs are based upon the following information provided by f) Site Investigation c) finance charges eastern part of the site
others:-
Geotechnical and Geo-Environmental: Preliminary report d) VAT – see 4.10. m) use of piled foundation solution
a) Architects Information prepared by GCC 28 September 2017
4.05 Assumptions made in the Preparation of this Cost n) no undercroft parking provision
(EX)1000 Existing Site Plan g) Specification
(EX)2010 Existing Site Constraints a) no requirement for a contract guarantee bond o) commercial units to ‘development shell’ specification for fit out by
(SK)001_A-Sketch Layout Option 1 The Glasgow Standard, Interim Standard September 2017 others
(SK)001-3-Phasing b) reasonable access / egress to and from the site for the
(SK)007B-1-Sketch Layout – Ground h) Specialist Operations appropriate plant and machinery p) steel frame construction for 5 storey and above with hybrid timber /
(SK)007B-2-Preferred Layout – First Floor steel / masonry elsewhere.
(SK)007B-3-Preferred Layout – Typical Upper No specialist works envisaged at this stage.
(SK)007B-4-Preferred Layout – Roofs
180328 Character Zones
p 46 p 47
B6

4.06 No Allowance Included for the Following 4.07 Significant Provisional Sums 4.09 Risk Allowance 4.10 Application of VAT
a) diversion of existing services unless otherwise stated a) MVHR, enhanced insulation, solar £7,200 per unit In accordance with cost planning principles, the following risk VAT is excluded from this report.
PV systems allowances have been made:-
b) works outwith the site boundary (other than drainage The application of VAT on construction is a complex area and
connections) b) Public Realm Enhancement Works £300,000 (i) Risks associated with design development changes, specialist accountancy advice should be sought by the Client to
e.g. statutory requirements (5%). ensure that the correct rates are applied.
c) mineral instability or ground decontamination treatments c) Streetlighting £195,000 (ii) Risks associated with site conditions, e.g. access
restrictions / limitations, adjacent buildings, existing VAT at current rate of 20% may be applicable to some elements of
d) abnormal foundations, unless otherwise stated sewers (2.0%). acquisition costs, new build construction, professional fees,
4.08 Prime Cost Sum Allowances (iii) Risks during design and construction associated with development costs and risk allowances.
e) kitchen appliances (other than within the wheelchair Employer driven changes e.g. scope of works, changes
bungalows) Allowance for meter installation and connection charges for the in quality and/or timing of the works (3.0%).
undernoted service authorities have been included:-
f) carpets and other floor coverings (other than vinyl within the
wheelchair bathrooms) a) Scottish Power
g) hoists within the wheelchair bungalows b) Scottish Gas Networks
h) NHBC Warranties c) Scottish Water
i) presence of asbestos within the ground (from demolition) d) BT
j) presence of Invasive Plants (Japanese Knotwood) e) Virgin Media
k) onerous SPT conditions with regard to subway twin tunnel Amounting to approximately £5,600 per unit. It is envisaged that
route adequate capacity is available for water, gas and electricity supplies.
l) water source heat pump (WSHP) installation along with

district heating pipework (Star Renewable Energy)
m) no works to river quay wall
n) no significant works to riverside walkway retaining wall

p 48 p 49
B6

Appendix 1 - Summary of Estimated Development Costs Overall Development Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
Overall Development Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Property Type Size Residential Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Total
Project Team Fees
Property Type Size Residential Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Social Rent Comm'l Total Architect 1.88% £ 765,900 £ 96,200 £ 374,700 £ 41,500 £ 264,000 £ 39,200 £ 105,200 £ 15,500 £ 22,000 £ - £ 862,100
Type A Flats 2B 4P 159 Nr 66 66 27 159 Landscape Architect 0.19% £ 77,400 £ 9,700 £ 37,900 £ 4,200 £ 26,700 £ 4,000 £ 10,600 £ 1,600 £ 2,200 £ - £ 87,100
Type B Flats 1B 2P 8 Nr 8 8 Civil / Structural EngineerEngineer 0.70% £ 285,200 £ 35,800 £ 139,500 £ 15,400 £ 98,300 £ 14,600 £ 39,200 £ 5,800 £ 8,200 £ - £ 321,000
Type C Flats 2B 3P 14 Nr 14 14 Services (M&E) Engineer 0.50% £ 203,700 £ 25,600 £ 99,700 £ 11,000 £ 70,200 £ 10,400 £ 28,000 £ 4,100 £ 5,900 £ - £ 229,300
Type D House 3B 6P 12 Nr 11 1 12 Energy Consultant 0.08% £ 32,600 £ 4,100 £ 15,900 £ 1,800 £ 11,200 £ 1,700 £ 4,500 £ 700 £ 900 £ - £ 36,700
Type E House 5B 10P 7 Nr 2 5 7
Quantity Surveyor 0.42% £ 172,700 £ 21,700 £ 84,500 £ 9,400 £ 59,500 £ 8,800 £ 23,700 £ 3,500 £ 5,000 £ - £ 194,400
Commercial 23 Nr 9 11 3 23
Principal Designer 0.10% £ 40,700 £ 5,100 £ 19,900 £ 2,200 £ 14,000 £ 2,100 £ 5,600 £ 800 £ 1,200 £ - £ 45,900
Total 200 Nr 23 Nr 101 Nr 9 Nr 67 Nr 11 Nr 27 Nr 3 Nr 5 Nr 223 Nr
GFA 20,471 m2 3,400 m2 9,885 m2 1,500 m2 7,110 m2 1,350 m2 2,696 m2 550 m2 780 m2 23,871 m2 Project Management 0.50% £ 203,700 £ 25,600 £ 99,700 £ 11,000 £ 70,200 £ 10,400 £ 28,000 £ 4,100 £ 5,900 £ - £ 229,300
Clerk of Works 1.15% £ 468,500 £ 58,800 £ 229,200 £ 25,400 £ 161,500 £ 24,000 £ 64,300 £ 9,500 £ 13,500 £ - £ 527,300
Cost per Unit Project Team Fees Total £ 2,250,400 £ 282,600 £ 1,101,000 £ 121,900 £ 775,600 £ 115,200 £ 309,100 £ 45,600 £ 64,800 £ - £ 2,533,100
Cost per m2 GFA
Land Acquisition
Purchase Price £ 1,000,000 * £ 550,000 £ 390,000 £ 150,000 £ 25,000 £ 1,115,000
SDLT £ 32,700 * £ 16,500 £ 11,700 £ 4,500 £ - £ 32,700
DV Fees £ 14,000 £ 4,000 £ 4,000 £ 4,000 £ 2,000 £ 14,000
Legal Fees & Outlays £ 24,000 £ 6,000 £ 6,000 £ 6,000 £ 6,000 £ 24,000
Other Acquisition Costs £ 8,000 £ 2,000 £ 2,000 £ 2,000 £ 2,000 £ 8,000
Acquisition Total £ 1,078,700 £ 578,500 £ - £ 413,700 £ - £ 166,500 £ - £ 35,000 £ - £ 1,193,700
Construction Costs
Building cost £ 28,786,200 £ 3,691,800 £ 13,937,850 £ 1,616,250 £ 10,025,100 £ 1,454,625 £ 4,008,952 £ 620,950 £ 814,320 £ - £ 32,478,047
Siteworks; site preparation £ 531,400 £ 55,400 £ 301,815 £ 26,894 £ 146,505 £ 24,053 £ 40,365 £ 4,485 £ 42,705 £ - £ 586,822
Siteworks; roads, parking and footpaths £ 1,690,000 £ 194,400 £ 853,450 £ 76,050 £ 566,150 £ 92,950 £ 228,150 £ 25,350 £ 42,250 £ - £ 1,884,350
Siteworks; boundary walls / fencing £ 408,000 £ 46,900 £ 206,040 £ 18,360 £ 136,680 £ 22,440 £ 55,080 £ 6,120 £ 10,200 £ - £ 454,920
Siteworks; landscaping £ 590,000 £ 67,900 £ 297,950 £ 26,550 £ 197,650 £ 32,450 £ 79,650 £ 8,850 £ 14,750 £ - £ 657,850
Public realm works £ 280,000 £ 32,200 £ 141,400 £ 12,600 £ 93,800 £ 15,400 £ 37,800 £ 4,200 £ 7,000 £ - £ 312,200
External Drainage £ 1,225,000 £ 140,900 £ 618,625 £ 55,125 £ 410,375 £ 67,375 £ 165,375 £ 18,375 £ 30,625 £ - £ 1,365,875
External Services £ 1,300,000 £ 149,500 £ 656,500 £ 58,500 £ 435,500 £ 71,500 £ 175,500 £ 19,500 £ 32,500 £ - £ 1,449,500
Minor Building Works £ 474,000 £ 54,500 £ 239,370 £ 21,330 £ 158,790 £ 26,070 £ 63,990 £ 7,110 £ 11,850 £ - £ 528,510
Works outwith site boundary £ 141,700 £ 14,800 £ 80,484 £ 7,171.84 £ 39,068 £ 6,414.15 £ 10,764 £ 1,196.00 £ 11,388 £ - £ 156,486
sub-total £ 35,426,300 £ 4,448,300 £ 17,333,484 £ 1,918,831 £ 12,209,618 £ 1,813,277 £ 4,865,626 £ 716,136 £ 1,017,588 £ - £ 39,874,560
Preliminaries 15% £ 5,313,945 £ 667,245 £ 2,600,023 £ 287,825 £ 1,831,443 £ 271,992 £ 729,844 £ 107,420 £ 152,638 £ - £ 5,981,184
Construction Costs Total £ 40,740,200 £ 5,115,500 £ 19,933,500 £ 2,206,700 £ 14,041,100 £ 2,085,300 £ 5,595,500 £ 823,600 £ 1,170,200 £ - £ 45,855,700
£ / m2 GFA £ 1,990 £ 1,500 £ 2,020 £ 1,470 £ 1,970 £ 1,540 £ 2,080 £ 1,500 £ 1,500 £ 1,920
£ / unit £ 203,700 £ 222,400 £ 197,400 £ 245,200 £ 209,600 £ 189,600 £ 207,200 £ 274,500 £ 234,000 £ 205,600

p 50 p 51
B6

Development Costs Risk Allowance

Topographical Survey £ 3,000 £ 1,480 £ 1,049 £ 404 £ 67 £ 3,000 Design development risk 5.00% £ 2,244,500 £ 271,200 £ 1,099,600 £ 117,000 £ 774,900 £ 110,500 £ 310,200 £ 43,700 £ 65,600 £ - £ 2,521,400
Site Investigation £ 33,000 £ 16,278 £ 11,543 £ 4,439 £ 740 £ 33,000 Construction risk 2.00% £ 897,800 £ 108,500 £ 439,800 £ 46,800 £ 309,900 £ 44,200 £ 124,100 £ 17,500 £ 26,200 £ - £ 1,008,600
Flood Risk Assessment £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000 Employer change risk 3.00% £ 1,346,700 £ 162,700 £ 659,800 £ 70,200 £ 464,900 £ 66,300 £ 186,100 £ 26,200 £ 39,400 £ - £ 1,512,900
Drainage Impact Assessment £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000 Employer other risk £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
SPT surveys / costs £ 8,000 £ 3,946 £ 2,798 £ 1,076 £ 179 £ 8,000 Risk Allowance Total £ 4,489,000 £ 542,400 £ 2,199,200 £ 234,000 £ 1,549,700 £ 221,000 £ 620,400 £ 87,400 £ 131,200 £ 5,042,900
Planning Fee £ 71,735 * £ 32,050 £ 25,650 £ 12,030 £ 2,005 £ 71,735
Building Warrant Fee £ 25,202 * £ 11,702 £ 8,666 £ 3,758 £ 1,076 £ 25,202
Tree Survey £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000 Cost Limit (Excluding Inflation) £ 49,378,600 £ 5,966,100 £ 24,191,200 £ 2,573,600 £ 17,046,800 £ 2,431,900 £ 6,824,000 £ 960,700 £ 1,443,500 £ - £ 55,471,300
Environmental Impact Assessment £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000
Archeological Survey £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000
Noise Survey £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000 Inflation Estimate
JKW Survey £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000 Tender inflation (to 2Q 2019) £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
SER Certification £ 1,000 £ 425 £ 250 £ 200 £ 125 £ 1,000 Construction inflation (1Q 2020) £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
Road Inspection Fees £ 31,000 £ 12,000 £ 8,000 £ 8,000 £ 3,000 £ 31,000 Inflation Estimate Total £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
Streetlighting Design Fee £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000
CCTV Surveys £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000
Flow & Pressure Test £ 8,000 £ 3,946 £ 2,798 £ 1,076 £ 179 £ 8,000 Cost Limit (Including Inflation) £ 49,378,600 £ 5,966,100 £ 24,191,200 £ 2,573,600 £ 17,046,800 £ 2,431,900 £ 6,824,000 £ 960,700 £ 1,443,500 £ - £ 55,471,300
EPC Certificates £ 10,000 £ 5,050 £ 3,350 £ 1,350 £ 250 £ 10,000
NHBC / Premier £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
Link Framework call-off fees £ 22,000 £ 5,500 £ 5,500 £ 5,500 £ 5,500 £ 22,000 VAT 20%
ENV 2 contribution to GCC £ 97,500 * £ 50,500 £ 33,500 £ 13,500 £ - £ 97,500 Acquisition £ - £ - £ -
Legal fees for Section 69 Agreement £ 15,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ - £ 15,000 Construction Costs £ - £ - £ -
RSL / GCC planning acceleration fee £ 20,000 £ 10,100 £ 6,700 £ 2,700 £ 500 £ 20,000 Project Team Fees £ - £ - £ -
RSL Legal fees £ 20,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 20,000 Development Costs £ - £ - £ -
Deed of Servitudes (City Property) £ 20,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 20,000 Risk Allowance £ - £ - £ -
Marketing Costs £ 22,000 £ 10,000 £ 5,000 £ 5,000 £ 2,000 £ 22,000 Inflation Estimate £ - £ - £ -
Capitalised interest £ 110,000 * £ 50,000 £ 30,000 £ 20,000 £ 10,000 £ 110,000 VAT Total £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ - £ -
Masterplan procecss- fees £ 40,000 £ 19,731 £ 13,991 £ 5,381 £ 897 £ 40,000
JPB Env. Assessment Consultant £ 10,222 £ 5,042 £ 3,576 £ 1,375 £ 229 £ 10,222
JPB Env. Consultant Validation Testing £ 6,000 £ 2,960 £ 2,099 £ 807 £ 135 £ 6,000 Overall Estimated Development Costs £ 49,378,600 £ 5,966,100 £ 24,191,200 £ 2,573,600 £ 17,046,800 £ 2,431,900 £ 6,824,000 £ 960,700 £ 1,443,500 £ - £ 55,471,300
UKWIR Testing £ 5,000 £ 2,466 £ 1,749 £ 673 £ 112 £ 5,000
Noise Survey £ 1,500 £ 740 £ 525 £ 202 £ 34 £ 1,500 Development Cost per unit £ 246,900 £ 259,400
Performance Bond £ 5,980 £ 2,950 £ 2,092 £ 804 £ 134 £ 5,980
Social Rent Commercial Social Rent Commercial Social Rent Commercial Social Rent Commercial Total
Streetlighting Design £ 1,000 £ 493 £ 350 £ 135 £ 22 £ 1,000
DV Valuations £ 2,205 £ 1,088 £ 771 £ 297 £ 49 £ 2,205 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
Legal Fees £ 5,288 £ 2,608 £ 1,849 £ 711 £ 119 £ 5,288
Development Costs Total £ 639,600 £ 288,300 £ - £ 202,500 £ - £ 110,500 £ - £ 38,400 £ - £ 639,600
Base Cost Estimate £ 44,912,600 £ 5,423,700 £ 22,001,000 £ 2,339,600 £ 15,503,100 £ 2,210,900 £ 6,209,600 £ 873,300 £ 1,314,300 £ - £ 50,451,400

p 52 p 53
B7
Art Strategy Approach
Govan. High quality public art is also a catalyst, drawing people to the area, generating
increased profile and accompanying economic benefits. We intend to take an approach
1. Introduction that will create links to Govan’s existing rich legacy, creating a new chapter for future
generations.
Patricia Fleming Projects is a contemporary art gallery in Glasgow. We work closely with
local, national and international visual artists across multiple art forms. We pro- Art uncovers the past, testifies to the present, and has premonitions about the future,
gramme exhibitions and events and work with clients and communities to shape and giving memories and aspirations form and communicating them to others. Embedding
deliver art in the public realm. Our portfolio is underpinned by twenty - six years of local art in the public realm gives a human touch to new public areas, promoting growth and
and international experience, including representing Scotland and Wales at the Venice embracing the new. Art can also connect people and places, it encourages a sense of
Biennale. belonging, and fosters a friendly, accessible atmosphere for residents and visitors. It
opens up the community and gives it individuality.
Patricia Fleming Projects work with a professionally equipped workshop with experi-
enced technicians who collaborate with artists to find solutions to create work for ex- As part of the Art Strategy we will research and develop the following areas:
hibitions and the demands of working in the public realm. We are located in the heart
of the arts district in the City of Glasgow close to specialist artists reading rooms and • Highlight key areas to create memorable and imaginative points of arrival, pause and
extensive library archives. travel through the main routes. This will make an open and attractive place for exist-
ing and new residents. Look at ways to draw people into the area, keep them longer
Patricia Fleming Projects clients include: Collective Architecture, Page and Park, Stal- and take advantage of the new pedestrian bridge from Patrick to Govan
lan-Brand, Metaphor, Scottish Government, Channel Four, NHS Greater Glasgow and
Clyde, Glasgow City Council, Glasgow Life, City of Turin, City of Marseille, Glasgow In- • Foster a relationship with Glasgow Museums to align a dynamic curatorial pro-
ternational Festival of Visual Art, The Glasgow School of Art and the University of gramme to link areas of interest for example: Govan’s ship building heritage and the
Project Proposal Strathclyde. Show People; creating live experiences of existing exhibits in the Museum creating
footfall from the Transport Museum
• Invite international and local artists to create artwork (permanent and temporary) to
2. Outline Approach -Water Row strengthen and refresh historic links for example: Doomster Hill which is currently
unmarked, Govan Old Church and grounds; surely one of Glasgow’s greatest unsung
The proposed new housing, commercial units, public facilities and open spaces in Wa- cultural assets and The Graving Docks
Project: Water Row – Art Strategy Approach (update July 2018) ter Row represents a turning point in Govan’s recent history. The development, is ar-
guably one of the most progressive building projects within the city in recent times. It • Design programmes to support a dynamic turnover of cultural activity in the area to
Client: Collective Architecture represents a new landmark and will connect existing communities in the area, bring make the best use of the new infrastructure. This will attract and retain audiences,
new residents to Govan along with visitors and those looking to relocate workspace. the spin-off will be new cafe’s, people wanting to work in the area and folks relocating
Prepared by: Patricia Fleming Projects Water Row offers a different live/work opportunity also to those across the city. as the connectivity with the wider city improves
Date: 4.7.18 Acting as a specialist advisor to Collective Architecture Patricia has had early consulta- • The strategy will strike a balance between respecting people’s homes as a private
tion meetings with Susan Hanlin of Central Govan Action Plan and Fiona space, while linking into public areas and citywide events. Artwork and way-finding
McTaggart,Chief Executive of Govan Housing Association. During this time, she has met commissions will enhance cycle routes across the new bridge with the potential of
members of the local community and has had wider discussions with the Water Row linking from Napier Terrace, to form an attractive and healthy commute.
Steering Group consisting of Glasgow City Council, Central Govan Action Plan and Gov-
an Housing Association during March and May 2018. • New River facing views and greater connectivity to the Clyde, provides a rich resource
to explore water-based activities, new water sports businesses could be encouraged
Through the integration of artwork with elements located in public spaces, we aim to to base themselves in Govan
inspire the public to discover the possibilities of art being part of the everyday story of
!2 !3
Patricia Fleming Projects, 225 South Block, 60 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1 5QH T +44 (0)7968 066708 studio@patriciaflemingprojects.co.uk Patricia Fleming Projects, 225 South Block, 60 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1 5QH T +44 (0)7968 066708 studio@patriciaflemingprojects.co.uk
p 54 p 55
B7
• The Art Strategy will facilitate cross generational workshops and build visual interest; • Taking ownership of projects and having knowledge from the ground up – has • Public art acts to activate the streets in a positive way during the day and evening -
bringing a buzz related to the positives of new homes and increased visibility/con- proven benefits for communities.Benefits for all when fully imbedding art strategies for example, lighting projects can address areas where there is concern over safety
nectivity during the preparation and +yrs of the build early enough in the design process
• Help to create a sense of community
• Develop a creative Green Strategy will make the most of high-level terracing; turning • Taking the lead on recognising the integral, as opposed to the periphery place for art
blank gables into creative green walls, lighting commissions to ensure the whole area in public realm, will help to open the door to partnerships with the likes of Art Fund • Bring new economic and social activity into the area
is attractive and connected and Creative Scotland
• Help to create a new, positive and diverse place and community
• Glasgow citizens are proud of the achievements of the City’s artist’s; they
• Artwork commissions will look to activate existing historic and new views, travel in • Be a benchmark offering diverse ways of place making, creating a model of good
understand the gravity of the Turner Prize. Taxi drivers are quick to point to key
and through on foot/bike through the main routes, quayside and lanes helping to practice for future development elsewhere in the city and across Scotland
buildings and are keen to relate the history of the city to tourists
connect other points of interest in and around Govan for example: Elder Park
• Health and wellbeing are well documented benefits of cultural activity 4. Outline Proposal
• We will commission artworks that offer moments of pause and refection; promote
health and wellbeing, mental and physical activity e.g outdoor gym commissions • We have a legacy of experimental practice, innovation and design. Glasgow has
been European Capital of Culture 1990, and UK City of Architecture and Design in In order to create an Art Strategy for the Water Row site we would undertake a series of
• A fresh approach to working with arts organisations immediately to the north, east 1999 milestones tied to the building works schedule:
south and west of the site to programme participatory events for the the lead-in and
post build: e.g. Govan Project Space • Getting the context, design and artwork right suggests an imaginative fully
•
engaged team, in a competitive market, it can make a difference Context Study
• Creative Dialogues
• Commission a writer-in-residence to record the journey and engage the local com- •
• For stakeholders, artists and the community the importance of embedding genuine Analysis
munity in the early planning of events and the commissioning journey •
consultation, lies in the value it will add to the development and the social and Informed Art Strategy
economic benefits it will bring to future occupants or users • Fundraising (research/strategy and matrix)
• Advocacy for Percent for Art • Inviting artists for initial proposals
• Advocacy and support from within and beyond is key to authenticity • Commissioning artists
• Progressive thinking on artists/makers live work homes and studio provision • Artwork project management
• Diverse voices bring different approaches, experience, and another way of seeing • Phasing: community projects followed by artwork
• Generate cultural tourism at home and beyond by bringing in internationally recog- • Evaluation
nised artists to build a dynamic public art collection for Govan. This will bring greater • This is important as there are a lot of active groups and policy makers currently
visibility for existing sculpture; for example the Mary Barbour statue by making new interested in the area
Sculpture and Heritage trails and walks.
• Bring the Creative Industries to the table with a view to developing maker spaces
• Build on existing local festivals and create links into other citywide events e.g. Glas- and micro-manufacturing
Mindful next funding application deadline prep for Green Infrastructure European
gow International Festival of Visual Art, Glasgow Sculpture Trail, The Clyde River Festi- Grant next deadline Nov 2018.
val to name a few • A ground breaking vision to provide artists homes and a variety of residencies with
live work opportunities will also create a lot of interest
3. Advantages of an fully engaged Art Strategy: • This approach will demonstrate Govan’s cultural and industrial significance in
5. Water Row Art Strategy consultant CV attached
Glasgow and beyond
• Before building work has even begun, local residents will be involved in a variety of
creative workshops and projects. This engages those who will, in time, occupy the • Commission the cities creative community will go straight to the core of END
new neighbourhood communicating local knowledge
• The production of a culture map/route will highlight hot spots in Govan and to other
near by areas of creative activity and socialising
4! 5! !6
Patricia Fleming Projects, 225 South Block, 60 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1 5QH T +44 (0)7968 066708 studio@patriciaflemingprojects.co.uk Patricia Fleming Projects, 225 South Block, 60 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1 5QH T +44 (0)7968 066708 studio@patriciaflemingprojects.co.uk Patricia Fleming Projects, 225 South Block, 60 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1 5QH T +44 (0)7968 066708 studio@patriciaflemingprojects.co.uk
p 56 p 57
B8
Contents 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1 About Govan Housing Association

1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 2
Govan Housing Association was established as a registered housing association in 1971 and
Briefing Document for Commercial Viability
1.1 About Govan Housing Association................................................................................... 2 has charitable status, owning or managing over 2,000 homes in the Govan area of Glasgow. Assessment
The Association is committed to regenerating the neighbourhoods we operate in, working
1.2 Governance and Decision Making .................................................................................. 4 with residents to provide employment and development opportunities as well as improving
the local environment to enhance the local area further. The Association is committed to
1.3 The Present and Future ......................................................................................................... 4
ensuring that each of our customers feels safe, respected and supported in the home they
2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT ..................................................... 6 have chosen.
3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................... 10 The Association is governed by a Management Committee who are appointed to oversee
the strategic direction and provide insight to the performance and development of services.
4. KEY OBJECTIVES AND REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................. 11 Day-to-day responsibility for service delivery is delegated to the staff through the Chief
5. EVALUATION APPROACH ....................................................................................................... 12 Executive.
6. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................... 14 Govan Housing Association is a forward thinking and dynamic ‘not for profit’ social housing
provider that owns and manages approximately 1,600 homes and provides factoring
7. OPTIONS FOR FOLLOW ON WORK ........................................................................................ 14 services to a further 600 homes in the Govan area of Glasgow. We employ over 70 talented
members of staff across the Association and our new repairs and maintenance subsidiary,
8. TIMETABLE ................................................................................................................................... 15
Govan HOME Team C.I.C.
9. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS .................................................................................................... 15
We are very committed to developing our staff and in June 2016 became the first Housing
10. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................... 16 Association in the United Kingdom to be awarded with all three of the top-tier Investors in
People awards; Investors in People Platinum, Investors in Young People Gold and the
11. PQQ CHANGES/TERMINATION.......................................................................................... 16 Investors in People Health and Wellbeing Accreditation.
12. CONTRACTUAL STATUS/FORM OF APPOINTMENT ......................................................... 16
Govan Housing Association’s core business is to provide, manage and maintain homes for
13. CANVASSING ........................................................................................................................ 17 people, to the highest possible standards. The Association’s mission is to be a responsive
organisation playing a leading role in the regeneration of Greater Govan and continuing to
14. CONFIDENTIALITY ................................................................................................................. 17 improve the quality of life of our residents.
15. PAYMENT TERMS .................................................................................................................... 17
Briefing Document for 16. SUMMARY OF HOW TO PARTICIPATE ............................................................................... 18
Govan Housing Association has five key Strategic Objectives, which assist the Association in
setting out how our mission statement can be achieved:
provision of 1. Provide a continually improving, high quality housing and factoring service that
meets the needs and aspirations of our service users and protects the investment.
Consultancy Services APPENDIX 1 ........................................................................................................................................ 19 2. Maximise participation, consultation and social inclusion in the delivery of our
Water Row – Mixed-Use Development services.
APPENDIX 2 ........................................................................................................................................ 21
Commercial Viability Assessment
3. Improve our communities, quality of life and living conditions through regeneration
APPENDIX 3 ........................................................................................................................................ 24
initiatives.
Contract Notice: July 2018 APPENDIX 4 ........................................................................................................................................ 25
4. Ensure that the Association’s services are delivered in a cost effective way.
Govan Housing Association
35 McKechnie Street 5. Ensure the business and viability of the Association is effective by providing efficient
Glasgow financial, administration and personnel systems.
G51 3AQ
The development, in the last year, of our Govan HOME Team subsidiary will enhance and
Telephone: 0141 440 0308 complement how we achieve these strategic objectives. We are hopeful that our
Website: www.govanha.org.uk performance and work to date will provide a solid foundation to work towards achieving our
overall strategic objectives. We are also confident that this will enable us to provide greater
Email: general@govanha.org.uk
community benefit and position us well to act proactively to meet the needs of our
1 2
p 58 p 59
B8
customers and the wider community. To help underpin this vision we have developed some Our most recent audited financial statements to 31 March 2017 demonstrate a surplus of Our recent Residents Satisfaction Survey and our Annual Return on the Charter demonstrated
key operational objectives for the HOME Team, which are: £1.1m. In addition to this we reported a turnover of some £7.8 million, of which £5.8 million and gave us a realistic review of where we are currently at as an Association. Despite many
was made up of revenue from lettings. We have strong cash reserves of £5.1 million and a successes and above average performance in some key areas, there remains room for
- To improve service delivery to all of our service users. healthy statement of financial position which demonstrates overall reserves of £9.2 million. improvement, service developments and enhancements. As we go forward for the future we
Our most recent financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the new shall be aiming to address these issues as we continue with our overall mission of ‘Moving 2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT
- To improve business efficiencies within the Govan Housing Association maintenance accounting requirements under Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 102 and the Housing Govan Forward’. The main areas we will continue to address are:
department. SORP 2014.
Introduction
- To continue to review our tenant participation and scrutiny approach and get both
- To generate surplus to re-invest into the local community that we serve. The key focus of our business is that customers are at the forefront of everything we do. There our customers and the wider Greater Govan community more involved in the work of
is a common goal through the company as each Directorate, team and each member of the Association to empower local residents to influence decisions and service 2.1 Govan Housing Association plans to engage a suitably qualified and experienced
staff collectively and individually contributes to achieving the vision, outcomes, values and delivery. consultancy team to establish the nature and viability of the commercial
- To ensure growth and meet priority needs. development proposed at the Water Row site in Govan. The consultancy team will be
aims of Govan Housing Association.
- To continue to grow and enhance our new repairs and maintenance subsidiary, required to prepare development appraisals and business cases to support the
- To ensure the provision of wider community benefits to the local area. The Management Committee has placed our residents at the heart of the culture of Govan Govan HOME Team, to ensure that our standards for both reactive and non- applications for the development and operating finance (grants and private
Housing Association. Plans whereby tenant’s views and needs are at the pinnacle of what emergency repairs continually improve and provide value for money to our tenants borrowing) required to establish each venture. This will include a major application for
We are confident that the quality of our properties and the repairs service we provide helps the Association aims to achieve are embedded in our training and development of staff and and service users. Glasgow City Deal infrastructure funding.
our tenants feel safe and secure. We’re committed to ensuring our homes are well- Management Committee members and the management of our contractors and partners
maintained. To do this, during 2016 we finalised and consulted on our planned investment we are fortunate to work with on a regular basis. - To establish a range of means by which to support tenants and the wider community 2,2 In terms of establishing the nature of the commercial development at Water Row,
programme which will underpin our planned maintenance programme for the next 10 year with the impact of the Welfare Reform and build on our success in supporting tenants you will be required to clearly define the type of commercial uses that could be
period. This programme presents an ongoing programme of kitchen and bathroom to secure key benefits to support them in their day to day lives. delivered at Water Row based on known opportunities, expressed demand and
replacement, as well as close decoration, boiler and heating replacement and works to community needs, and to demonstrate how each would benefit the wider Govan
1.2 Governance and Decision Making
fencing and other key environmental tasks. - To continually improve the standard of our stock through a comprehensive planned community and grow the Glasgow City Region economy,
The strategic leadership and direction of the Association is provided by a Management and cyclical maintenance programme, focussing attention particularly on our pre-
The Energy Efficiency Standard for Social Housing (EESSH) and its impact on our stock has 1919 tenement properties which provide such a rich heritage both locally and city- 2.3 We expect the viability of the various forms of development aspired to at Water Row
Committee comprising 9 members. The Management Committee is supported by a Chief
been assessed on an on-going basis over the last 18 months. This coupled with our wide. to be assessed on a Triple Bottom Line model, whereby the commercial viability of
Executive and Deputy Chief Executive, the Executive Management team. The full list of
maintenance and replacement programme, will ensure our tenants homes are warm, the venture i.e. the ability of the enterprise to cover its costs and produce a surplus, is
current Management Committee members and staff team members at the point of this
energy efficient and comfortable. - To build sustainable and holistic partnerships and communities and overall assist the considered alongside the social and environmental value added (and destroyed).
document being released can be found in Appendix 1. You should refer to this when
residents of Govan sustain their tenancies and live independently. We use the term “commercial viability” advisedly, as we wish to promote sustainable
completing the PQQ.
With the implementation of the new subsidiary, we will be looking to carry out the majority of enterprise at Water Row that brings inclusive economic growth and civic renewal to
the above tasks in-house with a view to seeking continuous improvements, improved value - To continually build and develop strong working relationships with our key partner Govan – a community that is currently one of the 5% most disadvantaged in Scotland
Each member of the Management Committee holds one fully paid share of £1 in Govan
for money and an enhancement to the services that we already provide. organisations, both locally and nationally, and underpin the key strategies behind the (SIMD 2016). Financial value is only one measure of viability and sustainability and it
Housing Association. The Executive Officers of Govan Housing Association hold no interest in
expansion of this work as we continue to deliver enhanced services, better quality must be considered in combination with the corresponding social and environmental
Govan’s share capital and although not having the legal status of “Director” they act as
Our values underpin all our activities, working practices and strategies and are summarised provisions and aim to mitigate the pressures placed, both upon our residents and the impacts.
Executives within the authority delegated by Management Committee. The members of the
as follows: Association.
Management Committee are unpaid. The Management Committee has seen a
2.4 Govan Housing Association (Govan HA) is commissioning this brief in partnership with
considerable change in its membership and governance over the last few years. The
We work hard to continually enhance our services and provide better - To continue to improve service delivery across all areas of our business so that our Central Govan Action Plan (CGAP), Govan Workspace (GW), and Glasgow City
Development governance of the Association has been significantly strengthened with the addition of a
quality homes and opportunities across the area. customers have access to the best service possible from an organisation they can Council (the Council) City Deal, who will form a Steering Group to oversee the study.
number of new members with a range of relevant knowledge, skills and experience.
We challenge ourselves and others towards excellence and trust.
Innovation innovation in all we do. Background to the project
We work hard to bring efficiencies and provide quality services that 1.3 The Present and Future - To work with key strategic partners to continue the larger-scale investment in our pre-
Value for Money are cost effective and present value for money. 1919 tenemental stock e.g. major stone-work repairs and refurbishments. 2.5 The Council, Govan HA and CGAP are advancing ambitious plans to create a lively
We are all equal and different and we aim to provide inclusive and attractive riverside development at Water Row in Govan that will rejuvenate the
Equality The Association has went through a number of changes in the past few years, which have
environments for work and for living. city’s waterfront and be a focus for community renewal. Viewed as being pivotal to
brought about a number of challenges, but with it has brought a number of great successes,
Govan’s ongoing regeneration, the development objective at Water Row is to create
Responsibility We all take responsibility for our actions. opportunities and positioned the organisation to move forward with the confidence that it
a very special place that excels not only in its physical quality and attractiveness as
We strive to ensure there is a positive social impact from our activities has the structures, staff team and expertise to enhance our performance and continue to
Social Impact and work with others to share our aims. drive towards our mission of ‘Moving Govan Forward’.
an important city destination but in its ability to generate inclusive economic growth
and improved individual wellbeing for the people and businesses comprising the
We are proactive in providing opportunities for people to engage with wider Govan community.
Integration us and we work hard to understand how people feel as individuals Looking forward into the future, we are conscious of the pressures currently being placed
and treat them with dignity and respect. upon the housing sector, notably: welfare reform, continued compliance with Scottish
2.6 The Water Row site is of great historic significance to both Govan and Glasgow. It was
Housing Quality Standards and the need to meet new energy efficiency standards,
Transparency We wish to be open and honest about what we do and how we do it. an ancient fording point of the Clyde and was also the epicentre of both the
development pressures to meet the Scottish Government’s targets for housing need and
We will endeavour to invest in community projects and promote medieval Kingdom of Strathclyde and the world’s nineteenth century shipbuilding
greater pressures on financing as a result of the wider political and economic environment in
intergenerational activities to ensure that young people thrive and industry. Immediately adjacent to the west is the former Govan Old Church, also a
Youth grow in an environment where their aspirations are nurtured, they are
which we operate. In light of these, we shall continue to review our business, implementing
site of great historic significance that will become an important focal point and visitor
Development robust controls to manage the various risks and carrying out the necessary business planning
encouraged to achieve the unexpected and they respect the Govan destination in the newly regenerated waterfront. Underutilised for the last 60 years,
in order to ensure that the sound financial viability of the Association is not put at risk in the
area as their home. the Water Row site currently has two temporary uses including two Show People
long term.
Yards and an informal car park.
3 4 5 2.7 Development will seek to capitalise on the Water Row site’s distinct heritage,
exceptional surrounding historic built environment and unique riverside location, to
create a neighbourhood and destination where people choose to live, work, play
6
p 60 p 61
B8
and visit. Water Row is well connected for those travelling by foot, cycle, public public and green space to enable a wide range of beneficial uses and activity to be development at Water Row from 2021 onwards. In time, the renewable energy
transport and car. Its locational advantages include being sited at the bridgehead of developed across the whole site. centre could be a further community asset and income generator as well as a visitor
the planned Govan-Partick river crossing, and at the centre of both the emerging attraction.
Waterfront Innovation Quarter and a cluster of major cultural destinations, including 2.13 Ideas and opportunities for commercial uses at Water Row have been collated in a including the Riverside Museum, SEC Hydro, Science Centre and Kelvingrove Art
the Riverside Museum. This is a unique riverside site whose locational advantages short paper in Appendix 4. This draws on the extensive knowledge and experience of 2.19 Govan’s often poorly perceived reputation at present means there is likely to be little Galleries. Providing desirable homes, business and leisure space in Govan is integral
create an unparalleled opportunity to establish a sustainable mix of desirable local partner organisations over the last decade, the Imagine Govan Manifesto 2017, expressed demand for commercial space at Water Row, certainly amongst the to the successful growth of the Innovation Quarter by providing an inspiring and
commercial activity at Water Row that could be transformative for Govan and the as well as feedback from recent public consultations. corporate property agents whose market analysis tends not to be sensitive enough to unique place to live and work. A key objective of this brief is to ensure the
city. pick up the potential of the Govan market. Demand will require to be generated, commercial floorspace at Water Row is brought on-stream in a way that harnesses
2.14 The prime commercial venture at Water Row will be the mid-market rent housing and there are credible local organisations, such as Govan Workspace, who have a and spreads the benefits of this economic growth for Govan and capitalises on
2.8 Mixed-use development is proposed, combining residential, commercial and leisure (MMR). This will be developed, owned and managed by Govan HA as a community successful track record in doing so. Similarly, while local demand is evident for demand resulting from both the Innovation Quarter and tourism development.
uses to form a unique and desirable neighbourhood and destination that naturally owned and controlled asset, with surpluses reinvested back into community. The enhanced community services such as the gym and restaurant, the operating and
extends and re-connects Govan’s town centre to the river and supports the growth of business model and governance structure is to be developed as part of the brief and development finance required to provide them is not. Commercial development at 2.23 The Govan–Partick Bridge, being brought forward via the Glasgow City Region City
the West End and Waterfront Innovation Quarter (refer to para 2.15 for further should be looked at in line with the requirements of the Scottish Housing Regulator. Water Row must therefore primarily seek to capitalise on community assets, such as Deal, and Water Row Masterplan will create a new urban cluster along Govan’s
information about the Innovation Quarter). The introduction of non-residential uses, in the MMR housing and unique river edge setting, to create an income surplus that is waterfront that will create a step change in footfall and activity and demand for
a mix of commercial, leisure and civic spaces, has a dual purpose. In place making 2.15 There is an aspiration to provide office and workspace that capitalises on Govan controlled in large part by the community and will help sustain the civic and cultural commercial space in Govan. The study must factor in changing demand levels. We
terms, these uses will animate the Water Row neighbourhood encouraging a diverse waterfront’s unique river setting and views, and its superb connectivity by foot and uses that will help reduce inequality and attract a diverse range of people to the expect significant modal shift once the bridge is complete, with increased walking
range of people and activity at all times and seasons. While in socio-economic and cycle. The general consensus is that Govan is a natural home for creative industry, area. and cycling journeys being made via the bridge and Govan to and from the
environmental terms, these uses will create added value by bringing, for example, with businesses specialising in Digital Technology, Film and TV, as well as Makers and University, QEUH, Pacific Quay, West End, South of the city and beyond. Cautious
new employment opportunities; the possibility of increased local trade; the creation Fabricators felt to be particularly relevant to Water Row and Govan Old. Govan’s 2.20 Current perceptions aside, the advent of the Govan-Partick Bridge and the Water modelling based on Clyde Tunnel and City Centre cordon counts suggest a minimum
of cash surpluses that could sustain enhanced local services, amenities and improve location at the heart of the proposed West End and Waterfront Innovation District Row Masterplan will create a unique location and set of relationships in terms of of 400 cycle trips and 2,800 walking trips per day. Add to this the impact increasing
livelihoods and wellbeing; as well as tackle the negative perceptions that persist offers opportunities to provide workspace for businesses seeking to locate or start up architecture, public space, heritage, views and connectivity that is without obvious tourist numbers may bring. In 2017, 1.3 million people visited the Riverside Museum. If
about Govan to re-establish a positive identity and civic pride. near the Innovation Quarter’s two anchors: a clinical innovation zone at Queen precedent. While the full positive impact is difficult to accurately determine, Govan‘s 10% arrived from the south via the bridge and a further 10% were attracted to walk
Elizabeth University Hospital attracting bio-med companies from all over the world waterfront is undoubtedly a prime site and the potential for transformation is great across the bridge as a river spectator or to reach tourist attractions at Govan such as
2.9 A Masterplan for Water Row was completed in August 2018, which outlines the mixed- and an interdisciplinary innovation zone around the Glasgow University Campus based on other known precedents. The study should therefore assess the best case Govan Old, Fairfield and other appealing offer at Water Row itself, which would result
use, phased development of the site. The first phase of development is programmed featuring digital technology creatives and nano and quantum technology firms. scenario for commercial development at Govan’s waterfront, by carefully in an additional 500,000 trips across the bridge each year (outward and return
to start by the end of 2019 and reach completion by May 2021. It will run in parallel Govan HA is also keen to consider the benefits of relocating the Association’s considering the changing demand levels over time, including whether other journey). What if the reality far exceeded these cautious numbers? This study must
with works to transform Govan Old into a cultural destination supported by 500 sqm of headquarters from McKechnie Street to Water Row, which would incorporate office important revenue streams might become evident, such as hotel or short term rentals consider the economic impact of increased footfall and use it to help inform how
new commercial space to be built along the river edge, and the construction of the space for the new mid-market rent subsidiary as well as a “social hub” (details to be for example based on growing visitor numbers through planned tourism best the cluster at Water Row should be formed to capitalise for benefit of the local
Govan-Partick Bridge, which will land at Water Row to create a new city gateway determined) offering services and meeting space to the community. Please note that development. community and the city.
and river crossing point. the Glasgow City Deal is an important grant fund that could be used to develop
commercial space at Water Row on the condition that that space brings high value 2.21 There are two local organisations, Govan HA and Govan Workspace that are well
2.10 Desirable homes are a main feature of the Water Row Masterplan alongside inspiring industry to Glasgow and helps to establish the West End Waterfront Innovation District. placed to develop, own and manage commercial space and community enterprise 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
places to work, do business, socialise, visit, exercise and relax. 200 new homes for mid- The assessment of demand for office and workspace at Water Row and Govan Old at Water Row. Govan HA will own and manage the mid-market rent housing at Water
market rent are planned, set in high quality public space. therefore must clearly evidence how this supply would contribute to the Row and is keen to support the growth of further commercial uses both social 3.1 The objectives of the study are to:
establishment of the Innovation Quarter, including how it relates to the other funding enterprise and private sector as well as civic uses. Govan Workspace (GW)
2.11 The Water Row site has capacity for 3,550sqm (up to 4,400 sqm) of commercial proposals in the area being considered by City Deal (the competition) and how it successfully manage workspace across four locations in Govan accommodating - Identify and refine the types of commercial and civic uses that both play to
space. There is an additional 800 sqm earmarked for development as part of the directly compares based on value for money and outcomes achieved. over 100 businesses. Via Govan Heritage Trust, GW require to develop a minimum of the strengths and opportunities of the Water Row site, would sustain the local
adjacent Govan Old Campus: 300sqm in the lower ground of the former church and 800 sqm of commercial space at Water Row to financially sustain Govan Old as a community in improved circumstances, and help grow the City Region
500sqm in a two storey new build along the river edge. These are maximum 2.16 There are lots of possibilities for well-being, leisure and visiting uses at Water Row, but national cultural destination showcasing the Govan Stones. Glasgow University and economy.
capacities relative to the proportion of residential properties to be provided on the this brief focuses predominantly on investigating the commercial viability of ventures the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital are two other potential property development
Water Row site and would produce around 5,200 sqm of commercial space across that require dedicated built space. A community gym is proposed offering indoor and management partners given their interest in establishing a successful and self- - Assess the viability of developing the identified uses by producing
the whole waterfront. Two of the key outputs of this brief will be to determine how and outdoor space that promotes a wide range of sports and leisure pursuits based sustaining Innovation Quarter that can compete for business at an international level. development appraisals and business cases. The assessment must be made
much commercial space can be sustainably developed along the Govan waterfront on land and water, including the notion of Water Row as a cycling hub. A Their interest in operating outside the two Innovation Quarter anchor locations at the using a triple bottom line model and factor in changing demand levels once
at Water Row and Govan Old without displacing or damaging existing supply in and restaurant/café should also be considered that, like the office accommodation, QEUH and University requires further investigation as part of this brief, not least to the Govan-Partick bridge is in situ;
around the town centre, as well as determining how best the space can be takes full advantage of the unique waterfront setting to become a successful establish whether their values fit and could sustain a productive relationship with
developed on a complementary and cost effective basis. To do so, you will require commercial enterprise that fosters further community growing, training or other food those of local organisations. - Do all of this in such a way that the information can be used to apply to a
establishing a baseline of current supply and considering changing demand over related initiatives, such as an artisan bakery or catering kitchen for example. wide range of sources for development finance (capital and operating
time given the impact of the bridge, growing tourist numbers and the growth of the Strategic context of the project finance both grant funding and private borrowing) to establish the desired
Innovation Quarter. 2.17 The Govan Saturday Market is an existing commercial use at Water Row and the ventures. This will specifically include a major funding application to the
shared aspiration is to retain and grow the market offer as part of the Water Row 2.22 The realisation of the West End & Water Front Innovation Quarter concept is a key Glasgow City Council City Deal Fund for the West End and Waterfront
2.12 Multi-storey residential development is envisaged with commercial and civic uses at development. The market and associated car boot sale is operated by City Markets, priority in the Council’s economic growth strategy for the city, and its development is Innovation Quarter (WWEWIQ) toward the capital infrastructure costs of
both ground and first floor level or in standalone ‘hub’ formations. The type of who can be contacted via the study steering group. supported by £113 million Glasgow City Council City Deal infrastructure funding. commercial floor space for the Innovation Quarter (refer to .
commercial space being considered includes offices, studios/micro-manufacture Govan and the Water Row site lie at the very centre of the proposed Innovation
workshops, and potentially live/work units if demand is evident. A community gym 2.18 The Association is also actively considering a river-source renewable scheme as a Quarter. The Govan waterfront is located at the Govan-Partick bridge that will 3.2 The consultancy services provided must assist the partners to critically review the
and restaurant/café are also proposed, which although predominantly civic in their sustainable energy source to heat the buildings at Water Row and the wider town physically connect the innovation hubs including the Hospital, University and Digital different potential business models in the context of best value, quality service
aims will have a commercial element. Buildings will be complemented by high quality centre. If viable, the proposal would be implemented as part of the second phase of Media Quarter at Pacific Quay as well as a cluster of important cultural attractions delivery, future growth and development opportunities, statutory regulatory
requirements, and governance frameworks and ensure that Govan Housing
Association fully satisfies the requirements of the Scottish Housing Regulator.
7 8 9
10
p 62 p 63
B8
4. KEY OBJECTIVES AND REQUIREMENTS 4.3 An assessment of market demand should be made drawing on a property agent 5.5 From the responses submitted, we will select participants to take part in the second
view but also, and more importantly, anecdotal evidence gleaned from key stage, the Invitation to Tender (“ITT”). Further details will be issued to the firms
4.1 A full SWOT and PEST analysis should be undertaken to identify commercial uses at organisations at local and strategic level. This should include those organisations shortlisted for the ITT stage of this process.
the Water Row site. linked to the Waterfront Innovation Quarter and to targeted industries. The Steering
Group will provide known contacts. You should consider how demand for Pre-qualification stage
4.2 The list of suggested uses (Appendix 4) should be refined to identify desirable commercial space may change over time following construction of the bridge rather
ventures, with the viability of the following assessed as a priority (if new ventures than look at Govan as it stands today. 5.6 At this initial stage you are asked to respond to our Pre-Qualification Questionnaire
emerge as a result of the sift the following mix of ventures can be adjusted with the which will enable us to evaluate your relevant experience and suitability for this e. Approach to contract delivery.
agreement of the Steering Group): 4.4 An assessment of existing supply/competition should be made. This should detail commission. The objective of the selection process is to assess the responses to the
existing capacity, vacancy rates and rent levels of commercial space in the wider Pre-Qualification Questionnaire and select suitably qualified consultants to proceed 5.15 Appointment of a preferred consultancy will not take place before the Association is
a. Up to 200 units of Mid-Market Rent Housing in a subsidiary of Govan Housing Govan Area (area to be defined). to the next stage of the procurement at which stage a full invitation to tender will be satisfied that:
Association. provided and a quality assessment carried out. It is envisaged that we will invite a
4.5 The viability of each venture should be established and a Development Appraisal minimum of 3 teams to the second stage, depending on the number and quality of a. The preferred firm actively operates the required standard policies as detailed in
b. Office and Workspace located at Water Row and the Govan Old Campus for: and Business Plan prepared. Details of the key items which should be included in a PQQs received. Section C of the quality questionnaire.
Business Plan for each of the above models are included at Appendix 2. This should b. The preferred firm has provided satisfactory evidence to support their response to
- Govan Housing Association Headquarters and the Mid-Market Rent be accompanied by a robust and comprehensive action plan for implementation. 5.7 The PQQ document gives an indication of scoring for each section. Appendix 3 gives the PQQ question on fair work practices.
Subsidiary (1500sqm). the guidance that will be used by the Assessment panel to evaluate received PQQs. c. Three satisfactory and relevant references have been secured.
4.6 The viability assessment must meet key funder requirements. It is anticipated that an The quality questionnaire itself also gives further guidance on the format of the d. The preferred firm has provided satisfactory evidence of their approach to risk
- Commercial business (community, social or private sector) but particularly application will be made to Glasgow City Deal for infrastructure funding to cover the submission and where relevant, space restrictions for responses. management.
enterprise from the Creative Industry Sector. A mix of office and or anticipated development deficit derived from building a portfolio of commercial e. There is no conflict of interest in contracting with the preferred bidder.
workspace targeting businesses linked to the Innovation Quarter, as well floors pace at Water Row to support the Innovation Quarter (i.e. excluding the Govan 5.8 Failure to provide a satisfactory response to any of the questions may result in Govan
as makers and fabricators whose presence would add visual interest and HA Offices, community gym and café). A City Deal funding application will require a Housing Association not proceeding further with the supplier. Deductions in score will
activity to the Water Row neighbourhood should be considered. Office Green Book Treasury compliant appraisal that clearly evidences the Gross Value be made for failing to adhere to any stated space limits or for failure to fully answer all 6. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
space could possibly be provided in a managed hub formation that offers Added (GVA) to the economy and also the demand for business space within the questions.
support and ancillary services for those businesses seeking to co-locate. wider Govan and City context. 6.1 The Association is funding this work through its own resources and funding from
Known precedents of interest include Toffee Factory (Sheffield), Round 5.9 Deductions in score will also be made for enclosing any supplementary information Glasgow City Council and Central Govan Action Plan and will seek fixed fee bids for
Foundry (Leeds), Whisky Bond and Glue Factory (Glasgow). Managed hub 4.7 An overarching statement should also be produced to outline the business planning not asked for, such as marketing brochures. professional services from the shortlisted firms.
formations should be explored fully and potential operating models approach for Water Row. This should detail the goals these ventures aim to
documented. The viability assessment must consider the proposed supply collectively achieve i.e. inclusive economic growth and civic renewal; the values that 5.10 Deductions in score or termination of application may be made for failing to submit 6.2 The fee for this commission has been set at £49,999. Any applicable VAT will be
at Water Row and Govan Old in unison and be set within an existing are implicit to this happening, the relationship or interdependencies that exist the documents in the format and timescale requested. payable in addition to this.
baseline of provision within the local area in order to understand the between the ventures and the organisations who own and manage them, as well as
relationship with and impact of the additional capacity proposed. For the the key assumptions made in the viability assessment. This is so the theory of change 5.11 Within your response, please answer all the questions specifically for your organisation 6.3 Those firms invited to the second stage will be required to provide a breakdown of
purpose of the City Deal funding bid, commercial space at Govan can be clearly articulated and business planning and delivery managed effectively and not your parent or holding company unless specifically requested. Please be how the fee will be apportioned to various aspects and stages of the commission.
waterfront must be presented in the context of the wider offer being for the whole Govan Waterfront on an ongoing basis. aware that some questions relate to the whole team while some relate only to the There will also be any opportunity at that stage for shortlisted firms to detail any
developed for the whole Innovation Quarter (Refer 2.15, 4.6). lead consultancy. anticipated additional expenses/ disbursements that the commission is likely to incur,
although Govan HA expect this to be minimal.
c. Community gym and associated sport and leisure uses, including possible 5. EVALUATION APPROACH Invitation to tender and quality assessment
river/water based uses and the notion of Govan as a cycling hub. A precedent of
interest is Projekt 42, a not-for-profit gym and wellness centre in Leith, Edinburgh. 5.1 The Association is carrying out a dual stage process to select the successful 5.12 At the second stage, The Association plans to use only a quality assessment to select
7. OPTIONS FOR FOLLOW ON WORK
consultancy. the successful contractor, having set a fixed fee for this project.
d. Restaurant/Café. The creation of a social enterprise, community-run and 7.1 Govan Housing Association is conscious of the time and cost that is involved in the
developed initiative should be explored as a priority alongside the benefits of 5.2 The project is being advertised on the PCS website 5.13 For the avoidance of doubt, please note that pre-qualification scores will not form
procurement process, both from the Association’s point of view and that of
private sector/independent provision. Models similar to the Social Bite and the 91 www.publiccontractsscotland.gov.uk. part of the second stage quality assessment. The second stage quality score will be
prospective tenderers. As a result, it seeks where feasible and within the boundaries of
Ways Project in Bristol provide known precedents. With this model it is important to derived from stage two written proposal, interview and presentation.
current procurement legislation and good practice, to develop a partnership
embrace the multi-culture of Govan. Other similar projects include London based 5.3 Please note that this is not a ‘regulated procurement’. Govan Housing Association is approach with contractors and consultants.
project, Brewbird, which trains ex-offenders in barista and baking skills, or the merely using the PCS website to ensure competition and value for money in the 5.14 In assessing the qualitative aspects of each shortlisted firm an interview/presentation
Square Peg in Swansea, where profits are given to charities, to buy a coffee to be selection process. will be required and it is anticipated that the following will be considered when
7.2 In this respect, successful completion of this specific piece of work may lead to the
given for free to a homeless person. Each of these provide a social touch which scoring the quality aspects, but confirmed details will be provided to those firms taken
offer of further discrete negotiated packages of work in the coming years.
the Steering Group are keen to embrace in the delivery of a Restaurant/Café 5.4 The first stage, which is the request to participate, will involve submission of a through to the second stage assessment:
model. The ability of the restaurant/café to branch out into wider community completed Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (“PQQ”). Please note that as the
growing, training and other food related commercial activity such as artisan anticipated fixed fee level (£49,999) for this procurement does not exceed the OJEU a. Understanding of the civic economy and its development in the Water Row
bakery, catering kitchen or fruit and vegetable growing spaces on the amenity thresholds, Govan Housing Association is not required to use the ESPD. Although the context.
terraces at water Row for instance, is of interest as a way of improving health and Scottish Government is encouraging firms to use the ESPD for below threshold b. Experience of triple bottom line viability assessment.
wellbeing. procurements, the view at Govan Housing Association is that a scheme-specific PQQ c. Experience of commercial property development in a ‘place-making’ context,
is currently a better vehicle to allow shortlisting. particularly in relation to Innovation Quarters and the Tourism Sector.
d. Any ‘added value’ that can be brought to the project by the applicant firm.
11 12 13
p 64 p 65
14
B8
8. TIMETABLE 10. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 13. CANVASSING
8.1 It is envisaged that the tender process and project itself will be conducted in 10.1 No claims will be entertained for any alleged deficiency, error or inaccuracy of the 13.1 Direct or indirect canvassing of any board member, employee or agent of Govan
accordance with the following timetable. This is intended as a guide and whilst description or other information contained in the PQQ documents which a candidate Housing Association by any candidate concerning this requirement, or any attempt
Govan Housing Association does not intend to depart from the timetable it reserves could have reasonably been expected to confirm for himself. Any doubt or obscurity to procure information from any Management Committee Member, employee or
the right to do so at any stage. as to the meaning or intentions of the PQQ documents or contradictions therein shall agent concerning this PQQ may result in the disqualification of the candidate from
be set out in writing to the person named above and an explanation obtained prior consideration for this requirement.
Action Timescale Purpose or desired outcome to the submission of the PQQ. Such explanations shall be provided as a matter of 16. SUMMARY OF HOW TO PARTICIPATE
STAGE 1 (PQQ) assistance to the candidate, but they shall not be construed so as to add to, or take 13.2 Details of our Management Committee members and current staff team are
Advertise project on PCS away from, or otherwise alter the meaning or the intent of the PQQ documents. contained within Appendix 1 for information to allow you, as part of your PQQ 16.1 Please submit your completed Pre-Qualification Questionnaire by:
4 September 2018 Ensure open competition. submission (Section I), to confirm if there is any conflict of interest.
website.
Submission in response to Clear date for which 10.2 It should be understood that Govan Housing Association is not liable for any costs 12 noon on Tuesday 18 September 2018.
18 September 2018 incurred by the tenderers in the preparation of their submission.
this questionnaire. submissions must be made.
Clear audit trail of assessment 14. CONFIDENTIALITY To:
Complete Assessment of 10.3 Proposals shall be made without obligation by the Association to acquire any of the
27 September 2018 process to ensure value for
PQQs. services included, or to discuss the reasons why the proposal is accepted or rejected. 14.1 All information provided in this PQQ and any resulting contract shall be regarded as Natalya Macholla
money.
Approval of tender list by confidential and must not be disclosed to a third party except where required to do Deputy Chief Executive
Delegated authority Good governance and ensure 10.4 The individual responsible for this contract at Govan Housing Association is as follows: so by law or the information is or becomes public knowledge. Govan Housing Association
Govan Housing
was sought at July we follow in house 35 McKechnie Street
Association Management
meeting procurement process. Name: Natalya Macholla 14.2 No announcements or statements should be made by or on behalf of any potential Glasgow
Committee.
Job Title: Deputy Chief Executive supplier to any section of the media (including social media, radio, television, G51 3AQ
Notification to tenderers
Email: Natalya.Macholla@govanha.org.uk newspaper, internet and e-mail) unless Govan Housing Association has given its prior
selected for Stage Two Transparency in selection
27 September 2018 Direct Dial: 0141 440 6892 written approval to the proposal to publish and to the text thereof. 16.2 Format: The Association requires interested parties to submit their completed PQQ in
and ITT issued/ feedback process.
on PQQ to all participants. both of the following formats:
10.5 You may wish to visit our website to assist you in preparing your submission in response 14.3 Govan Housing Association reserves the right to require the potential supplier to return
STAGE TWO (ITT)
to this PQQ: http://www.govanha.org.uk or destroy all copies of confidential information as identified by Govan Housing a. One hard copy of the completed questionnaire must be provided by the
Tender Return 18 October 2018 Three week duration
Association. deadline. It should be simply stapled in the top corner. Please do not enclose it in
Presentation to Govan
10.6 You may also wish to visit Central Govan Action Plans website to find out further a hardback folder or plastic wallet. Do not bind the document or add any
Housing Association and 25 October 2018 Quality Assessment.
details about the Water Row development and the current Master Plan process 14.4 The Data Protection Act 1998 applies to this PQQ and any resulting contract. corporate front covers.
Study Steering Group
which is taking place: http://www.getintogovan.com/projects/water-row/ or for key
Final checks on preferred Good governance/ risk
By 31 October 2018 background documents including Imagine Govan Manifesto PLUS
bidder. management.
http://www.getintogovan.com/cgap/about-cgap/ 15. PAYMENT TERMS
APPOINTMENT
b. One electronic copy of the completed questionnaire must be submitted. It can
Selection of successful 10.7 Further information on fair work practice can be found on
26 October 2018 Key project milestone. 15.1 Payment will be in three tranches: be submitted on disc or data stick along with the hard copy of the PQQ
tenderer. http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2015/10/2086/ document or can be sent electronically via email to
Standstill period – start. 26 October 2018
Good practice requirement. - 75% will be payable on submission of the draft Business Plans and supporting Natalya.Macholla@govanha.org.uk. If sent by email, it is your responsibility to seek
Standstill period – end. 6 November 2018
evidence as described in the brief and at Appendix 2. confirmation of safe receipt.
Appointment of successful 11. PQQ CHANGES/TERMINATION
contractor and placing Transparency in selection
6 November 2018 - 20% will be payable following the submission of all hard and electronic 16.3 Details on envelope:
contract award notice on process/Key project milestone. 11.1 Govan Housing Association reserves the right, subject to the appropriate information (including a written final report) and the establishment of a fully
PCS. procurement regulations, to change without notice the basis of, or the procedures operational version of the detailed Business Plans as described in the brief. ‘Pre-Qualification Questionnaire – Water Row – Mixed-Use Development Commercial
PROJECT COMMENCEMENT for, the PQQ process or to terminate the PQQ process at any time. Under no Viability Assessment’
Commence Tender. 6 November 2018 Key project milestone. circumstances shall Govan Housing Association incur any liability in respect of this - The final 5% will be payable following completion of presentations to the
Site Start. 6 November 2018 Key project milestone. PQQ or any supporting documentation Management Committee of Govan Housing Association and the Central Govan FAO of Natalya Macholla
Completion. 31 March 2019 Key project milestone. Action Steering Group.
12. CONTRACTUAL STATUS/FORM OF APPOINTMENT
9. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 12.1 No information contained in this briefing document, in the PQQ or in any
communication made between Govan Housing Association and any potential
9.1 If you do require further information or wish to obtain clarification on any point, you supplier in connection with this PQQ shall be relied upon as constituting a contract,
should in the first instance raise a question via the Q and A facility on the Public agreement or representation that any contract shall be offered in accordance with
Procurement Scotland website. This will allow the question and answer to be this PQQ.
accessible to all interested parties. Govan Housing Association will not enter into
detailed one-to-one discussions with any one consultant of the requirements.
15 16 17
p 66 p 67
18
• The proximity to the River Clyde, and potential for water-based activities
In time, new social enterprises might arise out of the local community.
B9
• Attracting enterprises from elsewhere in the city
The creation of social programmes - whether through encouraging existing social enterprises to
• Encouraging new enterprises to start from the local community and beyond
operate in Water Row, or by seeding new enterprises from the existing Govan community - would
• Linking new economic and social activity with the local community
require some revenue investment.
• Growing a community of sustainable micro (less than 10 employee) enterprises and social Cook Creative Statement of Potential
!
enterprises, which are less dependant on the external economic cycle (the opposite of the Why would businesses start up here or re-locate here? What
inward investment model)
would attract them? as a life/business choice, or even working in Glasgow’s space industry, etc) raising young
• Building in a genuine empowerment of the local community (as opposed to just
peoples’ aspirations
‘consultation’)
It is my view that in order to attract new enterprises to Water Row will involve:
• The potential to develop mentoring schemes. For example, in exchange for low rents, all
Water Row, Govan
businesses could be required to mentor a young person
Sectors and uses • Letting / managing space by a benevolent landlord (whether a housing association, community
• Programmes to support start ups by local people could be part of the ongoing work to ensure
trust or social enterprise)
Activating Water Row…the potential for non- Suggested sectors and uses for economic activity include:
• Curating a community of like minds (i.e. clustering of start ups / creatives / other sectors)
that new businesses created are generated by both ‘incomers’ and local people
• Good connectivity (Broadband; public transport; walking/cycling)
residential spaces uses

• River / water based uses
• Attractive / flexible lease terms (easy in, easy out; no long lease terms; inclusive rent terms and Empowering the community
_______________________________________________________________________________________
• Spaces for creative and digital micro-businesses
no hidden service charges)
• Making spaces and artisanal / micro-manufacture

In my view it is important that community empowerment here is more than lip service but is
• Support for new and growing businesses through start up and business development
Introduction These would fit into Leisure and Office/light industrial planning categories.
programmes
literally ‘in with the bricks’.
David Cook, of Cook Creative, was engaged by Collective Architecture to consider, as part of the • Most importantly, affordable / low rents with a shallow uplift curve (i.e. not just a brief rent free The local community has to have a genuine stake, and control over operational decisions within
These spaces would be for:
period or low first year rent with a sharp uplift to market rents in year 2, or similar commercial the site. This might extend to legal ownership of the working spaces and the social enterprise
wider masterplan phase, approaches to the development of commercial spaces within the Water strategies. Rental policy should seek to embed new businesses in the area for long term social hub space.
Row redevelopment.
• Start ups from within the local community and from across the city
and economic benefit)
• Established early-stage businesses re-locating into the Water Row

A new local trust (perhaps a development trust) could be created. To overcome fears that the
David has spent almost all of his career developing creative work spaces for different uses • Setting rents at the right level: it will be better in terms of sustainability and for activation of the
streetscape to be 100% let at a lower rent, than have a higher rental level with significant voids
local community might not initially have all the skills and experience (and confidence) to take on
(including making spaces, artists’ studios, performance spaces for dance and circus arts and While some of these businesses would be ‘incomers’, the intention would be to encourage new such a responsibility, the board could initially mix local residents with representatives of local
theatre, and creative industries workspace) and establishing and leading award-winning social enterprises to base their businesses in Water Row for the longer term and become part of the agencies (Govan HA, etc) with the percentage of community board members increasing over time,
enterprises. David is a Fellow of the RICS and Honorary Fellow of the RIAS.
Govan community themselves.
Live Work spaces eventually to 100%.
The following sections outline in summary initial thoughts on different potential approaches to To create new start ups or to encourage established businesses to relocate into the area, will
Live work spaces have been suggested. If these are to be considered further the following should There are agencies which can encourage and support such grass roots community
develop economic and social activity at the site.
require investment in business support / start up programmes and attractive lease terms. The
be addressed
empowerment, including Development Trusts Association Scotland (DTAS).
implications of this are noted below.
These have arisen in consultation with Susan Hanlin of Central Govan Action Plan and Natalya
• At whom are these units aimed? Singles and couples without children? It is unlikely that live- The alternative - of city agencies asking local people to trust that their wishes will be delivered by
Macholla, Deputy Chief Executive of Govan Housing Association in February 2018, and a wider
discussion with the Water Row Steering Group consisting of Glasgow City Council, Central Govan Social Enterprise uses work space would suit children
others - will not in my opinion provide sufficient connection with the local community to link the
• How would this be managed to accommodate people transitioning from single to a couple and new with the established successfully.
Action Plan and Govan Housing Association in early March 2018.
It has been suggested that the Water Row development should include a ‘social enterprise hub’ to ultimately to a family? Would people have to move?
Aims for the proposed non-residential spaces at Water Row

build on the work of ‘The Hub’ on Govan Road.
• Managing change of practice / cessation of business: what happens if someone ceases Business Planning Approach
trading? Do you move them out of their home?
Social enterprise activity could encompass:

• Is there really a demand for live/work in Glasgow? Live work thrives in urban contexts where In summary, the approach to business planning should involve:
The non-residential spaces at Water Row should:

there is pressure on rentals both for living and working spaces. Does sufficient pressure on
• Health and wellbeing initiatives
rents exist in Glasgow to justify live-work? Do we have the evidence for this?
• Activate the streets both during the daytime and at night

• Patience will be required. Returns will be long term, and modest economic and social returns
• A community gym operated as a not-for profit social enterprise
• Would low cost working space created adjacent to (but not integrated within) low cost living are likely in the first 3 to 5 years. Rather than shying away from this, it should be embraced.
• Anchor facilities and jobs in Water Row to create a sense of community (and build on the space address the perceived need?
existing sense of community) rather than just creating a housing estate

• Food initiatives: growing, preparing and sharing food
• If you want triple bottom line outcomes, design them in. This means prioritising social/cultural
• A social enterprise café which could incorporate a training kitchen developing skills of local If this is to be pursued, I suggest further research is needed.
outcomes ahead of the economic ones. It means ‘buying’ social outcomes (like an active
• Integrate the new economic and social activity into the established activity in the area
people in the hospitality industry

streetscape, a lively community, a great place to live and work, businesses committed for the
• Help to create a new, positive and diverse place
long term) by accepting lower financial returns
Fostering community links

• Be developed and operated in such a way as to act as a model for future development As a strategy for engendering social enterprise activity, initially existing social enterprises active in • Cross subsidy from housing rentals might offset the lower financial returns from working
elsewhere in the city and across Scotland
the desired sub-sectors (health/wellbeing/physical activity and food/healthy eating) could be Having working spaces within the site offers some opportunities for integrating the new spaces at spaces: measure the outcomes of the whole development not just individual elements in
encouraged to operate here.
Water Row with the existing Govan community in a number of ways:
isolation, even if these outcomes are ‘owned’ by different agencies
Opportunties • Economic outputs will be modest in the initial years, both in terms of rents generated and jobs
A good example of a (relatively new) social enterprise gym which provides both physical activity • Social enterprise hub / café within the site focused on the community
created. Long term change takes a long time!
and a more holistic approach to wellbeing is Projekt42 in Leith https://www.projekt42.co.uk.
The Water Row site and the aims and ambitions for the establishment of a new model for similar • Employment opportunities in new industries
• Low initial rents and flexible easy in-easy out terms will be required to attract new businesses,
developments, suggest a number of advantages and opportunities for commercial and social with a shallow uplift curve (i.e. no cliff edge rent increases)
Food initiatives who might be able to provide services in the area include You Can Cook http:// • Businesses in the sectors noted above will provide very visible role models in potential careers
activities:
www.youcancook.org.uk and (Southside’s own) Locavore https://glasgowlocavore.org.

beyond the ‘normal’ careers available to young people (e.g. design as a career, self-employment • Investment will be required in programmes to support start up and early stage businesses
• Curating the community of businesses will be required to create the right environment. This will
mean refusing inappropriate uses and encouraging others that are desirable on a continuing
basis (i.e. not just year one) to create a good tenant mix
David Cook, Cook Creative, 12th March 2018
p 68 p 69
B9
Presentation boards developed in response to Statement of Potential Presentation boards developed in response to Statement of Potential
(displayed during Public Consultation Event 3 in April 2018) (displayed during Public Consultation Event 3 in April 2018)
A WATER ROW_Initial Ideas & Potential Uses Initial Ideas & Potential Uses
Work and Industry
Potential new uses and activity
Visit
Potential new uses and activity
Housing
Introduction The examples shown below showcase recent housing developments that have been provided to stand the test of time.
There are opportunities for office and/or workspace to be proposed at ground level within and around Water Row or within a self-contained Govan has a rich and vibrant heritage with opportunities to build on the existing activity taking place in and around the area, including at the
building (community suggested Social Enterprise Hub). This could offer managed work space and shared public meeting/cafe space that Riverside Museum which currently attracts 1.2million visitors per year. By layering things to see and do at Water Row we create the “power of
Govan has the potential to become much more richly layered in the range of uses, activity and people that are attracted to it - it can become more targets businesses with similar interests seeking to co-locate. Additionally, 500sqm of lettable floorspace has been identified as a minimum to Each example varies in scale, form and approach depending on site, client and architect, however the following is common to all:
ten” - a multiplier effect that increases the dwell time of visitors and boosts economic and social benefits for the community. Water Row offers
desirable and vibrant. Changes at Water Row can have regenerative benefits to the wider Govan community and the city. The panels on show financially sustain Govan Old, ideally designed in such a way to create an enterprise campus around the church. the potential to become part of the wider cultural resource cluster including the Science Centre, Kelvingrove Museum, Fairfield and the Hydro/
today demonstrate some of the potential new uses that have been suggested for the site throughout the Masterplan consultation process to date. • Maintenance and durability
SECC etc
Increasing Work and Industry Ideas 2.1-2.5. below provide potential opportunities for Govan and requirements which development at Water • Involvement of local community/client group
Uses can be presented within four overlapping categories: • ‘Massive Passive’ approach to building energy – passive solar gain, good insulation and air tightness
• Live – housing, transport (inc. parking and cycling). Row could seek to provide for.
• ‘Designing out’ the need for high cost items – particularly below ground ‘unseen’ costs - such as utility diversions, retention.
• Work – office and work space, developing local economies such as retail, training space. • Use of as high quality – and ‘honest’ - materials as possible within the budget constraints
• Play / Leisure – socialising, exercise, sports, leisure, play, food & drink, retail. • Flexible, well proportioned rooms.
• Visit – attractions, opportunities to linger & learn. 2.1. Creative Industry enterprise hub could be either office space enabling 3. Play / Leisure 4. Visit • Well overlooked and safe gardens, streets and shared areas.
This is a highly dynamic and growing industry sector the co-location of social enterprises and community
There are many types of activities and uses that could be fostered at Water Row and many ways these could be delivered. Overarching principles in UK, Scotland and Glasgow, and is targeted for services (perhaps fostering community enterprise 3.1. Slipway / Access to the River – Opportunities 4.1. Govan Old & the Govan Stones – A major
growth by Glasgow Economic Leadership (GEL) start-ups), or office space provided on a social to introduce water sports and river activity. Activity cultural attraction showcasing early Viking and
to be considered when appraising options include: given its potential to regenerate economies and enterprise model for any business type seeking to attracts people to linger and watch the goings on Christian burial stones. There is the possibility to Policy and Guidance
create jobs . It is a highly diverse sector that can locate in Govan, particularly creative industries. and the following have so far been suggested: team with the PI in promoting wedding and event
• Uses and amenities should cater for the needs of the existing Govan community, as well as encourage others to choose Govan as a place to live, be summarised as businesses that have creativity at Enterprise hubs are commonly arranged with potential.
their heart, including: software & computer games, publicly accessible active ground floors including a) Glasgow Kayak Club currently access the river
work and visit. music, performing arts, literature, design, film & on the Kelvin slip but require changing and storage 4.2. National Centre Medieval Sculpture – is an
café space potentially becoming a bar/event space
• Well-considered use of indoor and outdoor space (both public and private), will allow a wide range of beneficial uses and activities to be video, crafts, fashion, visual arts, TV and radio, and in the evening. Examples include The Melting Pot space that cannot be accommodated on the north idea promoted by Govan Heritage Trust as a spin-
developed. advertising. Creative Industries bring an important in Edinburgh, Robertson Trust Charity Hub, Toffee bank. Can Water Row provide river access, changing off from Govan Old and the Govan Stones Visitor
• Uses and activity can be provided through charitable and social enterprise, as well as private commercial models, including independents and “placemaking” aspect as well as an economic uplift Factory Newcastle, Round Foundry Leeds. Surveys & storage? Centre. This requires additional floorspace in vicinity
through job creation and the multiplier effect, as they suggest there is a shortage of community meeting b) Triathlon Events of church.
larger enterprises. Each have merits and, with careful management, can be beneficial in empowering the community over time. bring their own creativity & culture to the location and space and office space locally. Could Water Row c) Jet Ski Hire – (possible community enterprise)
tend to be outward facing providing opportunities to provide this? d) Public access to river for small boats by reversing 4.3. Showpeople Museum – is an idea suggested
Housing &
learn & inspire. Creative Industries are attracted to trailer down the slip. (This would require a small by the Showpeople based on a previous HLF funded
places like Govan which can be accessible; affordable pontoon). project; Fair Glasgow. This has the potential to be
and provide flexible & high quality accommodation, 2.3. Office Headquarters for the Mid Market Rent developed further in conjunction with the Showmen’s
Community
a distinct character & community. Providing Housing and Renewables Subsidiaries 3.2. Places to sit and gather - including provision Guild.
accommodation on a social enterprise basis would Could provide visible presence and active supervision of green space in sunny and sheltered spots with
enable rents and accommodation quality to be locally of the Water Row neighbourhood, can activate the key views of the river, Riverside Museum, Govan 4.4. Saturday Market – refer 2.6
controlled avoiding unwanted gentrification whilst area during the day, and the possibility to reinvest Old and/or event/performance space. Examples in Glasgow
empowering the community. surpluses to provide enhanced community services. 4.5. The spectacle provided by bridge opening/
3.3. Walking/Running/Skating/Cycling – with closing and general increase in river activity can
The following are examples of existing and potential 2.4. Innovation District clear routes along the waterfront, to key destinations provide additional reasons to enjoy spending
industries for Govan. Govan is at the heart of the proposed West End including the City Centre and West End, and time at the river side.
Places to live........ & Waterfront Innovation District. There will be two developing a measured loop utilising Govan/Partick,
New life blood – more anchors: a clinical innovation zone at QEUH attracting Arc, Bells and/or Millennium Bridges to run, walk, 4.6. Restaurant / Café - can provide further reasons
Strengthen connection to people walk and cycle to a) Digital Technology – a Digital Technology cycle set distances as a training regime. to visit Water Row and increase the time spent in the
bio-med companies from all over the world and an
Govan Old as a focal point, and through Govan
niche has already developed at Fairfield with interdisciplinary innovation zone around the Glasgow area.
land mark and destination Rookie Oven and others providing (largely) positive 3.4. Play area - public space designed to include
University Campus. This will create spin-offs and
testimonials about their move to Govan. Digital is start-up enterprises, fostering an entrepreneurial opportunities for formal and informal play for all ages 4.7. Govan – Maritime Quarter – is an idea which
PROPOSED
one of the fastest growing industries in UK and culture with business acceleration programme in throughout the neighbourhood. uses the bridge to physically reconnect both banks
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
LINK FROM GOVAN internationally, and Glasgow has the biggest digital/ four key sectors: of the river enables a new urban quarter to develop
TO PARTICK innovation economy in Scotland (£480M GVA in 3.5. Cycling Hub – a meeting point for cyclists at that celebrates Glasgow’s exceptional shipbuilding
2014 with 26K jobs). Digital Tech industries prefer to • Smart Campus the new bridge head. Cycle Hire could be included & maritime heritage and brings the river to life in new
Opportunity to reconnect
co-locate and cluster but digital connectivity is vital • Precision Medicine & Chronic Diseases (potentially a community enterprise) and links to the ways. The concept of the Maritime Quarter could
people and the river to live,
Potential to create pleasing work and play – superfast broadband. This is the engineering of • Nano & Quantum Technology NEXT Bike Cycle Hire Station at Govan Cross. incorporate the Riverside Museum, Tall Ship, Graving
streets that complement today with ability to inspire new generations. Could • Creative Industry (digital technology) Docks, Water Row, Waverly, Steamer SS Queen
Govan’s existing tenement Water Row provide the environment to attract more 3.6. Community Gym – Based on the Leith Model, Mary, Kelvin Harbour, Govan Old and Fairfield etc.
tradition. digital technology firms to Govan? Innovation will be the industry driver that shipbuilding and potentially promoted and developed by Govan
Strengthen historic links, and engineering was in the 18 and 19th centuries, and HA in partnership with Glasgow Life as a community
highlight important views and b) Film & TV – Water Row is next door to Pacific Glasgow is currently one of the foremost locations in enterprise. Opportunity to offer indoor gym, training, Other uses........?
showcase heritage
Quay, home of digital media in Glasgow including the world to pursue advances in precision medicine. dance space and to use and design the public
the BBC and STV HQs. Film City, a private company, Can Govan capitalise on its pivotal location by outdoor space for training e.g. running loop or track
based in the former Govan Town Hall and home to providing workspace for businesses seeking to along river, training on the steps to the bridge.
Please tell us your thoughts about
New buildings reflect and
reinstate the historic layout internationally renowned production companies such locate or start up in the Innovation District? other possible types of activities
of Govan Cross as Sigma Films, need to expand and are currently 3.7. Restaurant – unique waterfront location. This and uses that should be considered
NEW BUILDINGS seeking bigger studio and associated office space. a) Life Science / Bio Medicine – Scottish could be another possible community enterprise
DEFINE, ADD Could Water Row provide office space for such Enterprise 2016 identified the need for additional linked to community growing & training initiatives. This
at Water Row. Eribol Street, Glasgow
Building height should CHARACTER AND companies to enable Govan to become an integral multi-occupancy accommodation and incubator could help anchor a civic space in the development
reflect the existing BRING ACTIVITY TO part of the Clyde-side broadcasting corridor ? units in the city nearby the QEUH. but requires an entrepreneurial restauranteur to National and European examples
Play / Leisure
traditional 19th century GOVAN CROSS.
champion.
buildings
c) Makers and fabricators such as sculptors, b) Nanotechnology businesses often have very
furniture makers, cake-makers, jewellers. specific locational requirements due to the nature of 3.8. Fairground Rides – This would have the
the product. Glasgow Uni is currently seeking a new potential to act as a draw from Riverside Museum
Some independent makers and fabricators may home for the James Watt Nanotechnology Centre and could utilise heritage themes in its design. This
require Live/Work units, either self-contained or and locations in Govan are being considered. This maintains a link with the Showpeople heritage and
a workshop separate to a living space located is a world renowned centre with only one other culture.
nearby. Making and fabricattion processes are often counterpart in the UK in Southhampton. Water Row
interesting for passers by, so work units could be is not a suitable site for the JWNC but could possibly 3.9. Saturday Market – refer 2.5
positioned at street level allowing engagement and suit spin-off companies.
vibrancy to the street. The surrounding residential 3.10.Event/Performance Space – The public space
environment would prevent large or heavy industrial 2.5. Retail incorporated into a developed Water Row could twin
uses but lighter repair and making could be facilitated. Any retail provision must be carefully considered with the Riverside Museum public realm to host larger
Visit Work
Could Water Row (with a public access slipway) to avoid displacing or competing with existing town events (noise/nuisance factor to be considered).
provide a boat building or repair presence? Could centre offer. Space must also be provided to accommodate Govan
Places to meet & gather....... Places to work...................... light repairs facilities and businesses be encouraged • Continued presence and expansion of Govan Loves Christmas and other community events.
from communities such as the show people? Could Saturday Market, potentially with complementary
facilities be developed for a Community bakery (eg. specialist markets using indoor space at PI or
“Jack’s Rolls” bakery used to be located at corner of other nearby venues.
Water Row/ Pearce Lane), or a catering kitchen for • If the slipway is re-opened as a public access point
new catering business? Could Water Row provide to river, related commerce could expect to develop
artist studio space – potentially linked to Clydebrae e.g. boat chandlers, small boat repairs
St Studios & Buzzcut Festival? Could Water Row • Coffee & Snack Kiosk. Possibility to bring back
provide the impetus for a major design practice to the original Govan Police Box (TARDIS). Other
make Govan its home? existing locally owned kiosks and informal food
provision businesses could be encouraged to
2.2. Social Enterprise Hub provide a presence.
The idea for a social enterprise hub was suggested • Restaurant/Café – see Play/ Leisure section.
in the Imagine Govan Manifesto 2017. The social • Speciality or destination shopping.
p 70 p 71
Scott Bennett Associates (Group 2) Ltd
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
January 2018
B10
Site Details Site Name Water Row Masterplan, Glasgow
National Grid Reference 255470E 665860N
Closest Post Code G51 3UW
Site Area 3.16Ha (approx.) Desktop S.I. Executive Summary
GOVAN HOUSING ASSOCIATION Local Authority
Current Usage
Glasgow City Council
Car parking, show people housing, subway tunnel
Former Usage Ship building, dye works, housing, subway tunnel
DESKTOP STUDY REPORT Site History The Govan Masterplan area extends from Govan Cross north to the River Clyde,
west to Govan Wharf and east to Napier Terrace. The area to the west Water
Row contains the Phase 1 area and the New Govan Development site occupies
WATER ROW MASTERPLAN, GLASGOW
Scott Bennett Associates (Group 2) Ltd January 2018
the north west corner. A tarmac car park to the east of Water Row comprises the
AT eastern area of the Masterplan site. The Phase 1 area is the initial area proposed
for development. Other Considerations The SEPA flood map indicates to be at medium to high risk of surface water
A burial ground and church lie adjacent to the western boundary of the site. A flooding and detailed Flood Risk Assessment of this is recommended.
manse and associated garden were adjacent to the burial ground. While to the It is not possible to discount the presence of buried foundations across the site.
WATER ROW, GLASGOW east of Water Row a dye works is shown along with an un-named watercourse. A Utilities All utilities have been identified in the vicinity of each of the sites but no major
ship building yard occupied the eastern boundary of the site from the 1860’s utilities enter the west of the site. A 300mm dia. vitreous clay pipe extends from
DESKTOP STUDY REPORT before removal of the dye works. At this time the shipyard expanded to form the Napier Terrace to Water Row and a 375mm dia. concrete surface water pipe
Govan Shipyard. A ship building yard is shown in the north west from 1895 which
FOR expanded to occupy the land to the west of Water Row.
extends along Napier Road, terminating to the north of Napier Terrace.
Capacities of the utilities should be confirmed at design stage. A Vodafone fibre
The site was occupied by shipyards until the 1970’s when it became disused. The optic underground cable route is shown beneath the east car park, the northern
majority of the site is shown to have been cleared between 1975 and 1979. end of Water Row and impinges marginally in the northeast corner of the Phase 1
The Glasgow underground subway tunnel was constructed between 1860 and
GOVAN HOUSING ASSOCIATION 1896 and underlies beneath the west of the site beneath the Phase 1 area, SPT Subway Tunnel
site.
The subway tunnel has been identified underlying the Phase 1 site and extends
running from Govan Cross north west towards the River Clyde. from beneath Govan Cross to the north west. The tunnel location should be
The land surrounding the sites has a mixed history, with residential properties accurately surveyed in the first instance.
located to the south and a mix of shipbuilding, industrial and commercial The impact of any future development on the integrity of the tunnel must be
properties to the east. investigated and SPT have a number of specific information requirements that
Documented Ground The superficial deposits underlying the site comprises cohesive and granular have to be submitted. Future site investigations should ensure that sufficient
Conditions alluvial soils with sand, gravel, clay and silt and it is anticipated that made information is recovered to fulfil this. In addition, SPT has indicated that a
ground, relating to past and current development will overlie the natural soils. minimum of six months should be allowed for consultation on any development
Bedrock, belonging to the Carboniferous age Limestone Coal Formation underlies in close proximity to the tunnels. It is anticipated that a 5m wayleave will be
the site, at depths of between 20m and 30m below ground level. accepted by SPT.
Potential for Potential sources of contamination have been identified on the sites located west In addition to the 5m wayleave required adjacent to both sides of the tunnel, the
Contamination and east of Water Row associated with shipbuilding and dyeworks. Furthermore, tunnel could also have an impact on future development and noise and vibration
it is not possible to discount migration of contaminants from off-site sources surveys are likely to be required as a condition of planning.
towards the sites and similarly from the site to the River Clyde.
As a result, intrusive environmental site investigation and risk assessment would
be required to assess if any remedial measures would be required to ensure that
Project Reference: J3916 the sites would be considered suitable for a proposed residential use.
Issue No Prepared By Approved By Potential for Ground Gas Made ground overlying the natural soils is anticipated across the site which may
generate ground gas. In addition, the natural Alluvial soils may contain a high
January proportion of organic matter. Ground gas generation cannot be discounted and
V1 ORIGINAL
Scott Bennett Associates (Group 2) Ltd 2018 as a result, further assessment is necessary to assess if any protection measures
Orion House, 7 Robroyston Oval would be required within any new development.
Nova Business Park Mining Instability The sites are not located within a mining Development High Risk Zone and no
recorded or probable shallow mine workings have been identified at the sites or
Glasgow
in the area. As a result, the risk associated with instability is considered to be low
G33 1AP and no further assessment is required.
T: 0141 558 3255 Ian Lockie Robert Storey Foundations The natural soils across the site are anticipated to be variable in nature and
E: enquiries@sbag2.com consistency. As a result, it is not possible to assume that conventional shallow
Senior Geotechnical Engineer Managing Director
W: www.sbascotland.com foundations will be suitable for use for any new development. Geotechnical
Scott Bennett Associates (Group 2) Ltd ground investigation is required.
Orion House, 7 Robroyston Oval, Nova Business Park, Glasgow, G33 1AP
Project ID: J3916.03 Telephone: 0141 5583255 Email:enquiries@sbag2.com
There are a number of constraints associated with the subway tunnel that
Dated: January 2018 underlies the Phase 1 area relating to the undertaking of SI and also to the type
of foundations that could be used at the site.
J3916 – Water Row Masterplan
p 72 p 73
This report has been prepared for the sole use of the client – no other party is entitled to rely or act upon it or to reproduce all or any
part of it without the express prior written consent of the author. The author cannot be held liable for any third party claim arising.
B11
Instruction
Purpose and scope of report
I have been instructed by rankin fraser landscape architecture on behalf of Govan to
ARBORICULTURAL conduct an arboricultural survey and to report on several trees on a number of sites in
and around Govan town centre.
In this report, terms used that have Initial Capitals are proper nouns, have a recognised
formal meaning or are defined in the Glossary appended to the report. Tree Survey
REPORT A report is required in accordance with BS 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design,
Reproduction, assignation and reliance demolition and construction – Recommendations – recording the results of a tree
survey, providing retention desirability categorisation and giving preliminary advice on
subjects at This report has been prepared for the sole use of the client – no other party is entitled to appropriate Root Protection Areas ("RPAs") for all the trees or groups of trees.
rely or act upon it or to reproduce all or any part of it without the express prior written
Govan Town Centre consent of the author. The author cannot be held liable for any third party claim arising. In accordance with BS5837 the trees have been assessed independently of any
specific design layout I have been provided with.
Notwithstanding, this report may be made available without the author's express
for consent to any statutory consultees insofar as the report may be required for Planning
I have not been instructed to produce a tree protection plan (Clause 5.5), Arboricultural
Impact Assessment (Clause 5.4) or Arboricultural Method Statement (Clause 6.1).
matters.
Govan Housing Association This report is not a tree hazard and risk assessment, and any reporting on risk is
restricted to instances (if any) where trees were observed that might present an
Qualifications imminent and serious hazard to life or property (where the risk is assessed as
April 2018 'Unacceptable'). Where other trees present a lesser (but still less than 'Acceptable') risk
BS 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – to people or property, this will be reflected in the categorisation of the tree. This report
Recommendations - requires tree surveys to be carried out by an Arboriculturist, should not, therefore, be misconstrued as fully addressing the occupier's duty of care
defined as "a person who has, through relevant education, training and experience, responsibilities at common law and under the Occupier Liability Acts. This is particularly
gained expertise in the field of trees in relation to construction". true if and when the modes of occupation of the site and the positions of buildings and
structures change.
I, Julian Morris, am the author of this report. I am a professionally qualified
arboriculturist holding the Arboricultural Association Technicians Certificate, the The site is identified on the drawings provided to me, and where required these
LANTRA Professional Tree Inspectors Certificate, a Bachelor of Science Degree, drawings have been adapted by me to show only the trees recorded during my surveys.
Certificate of Public Sector Administration and a Diploma in Surveying. I am is also
qualified and experienced practising tree surgeon with a good working knowledge of To accord with BS5837, only trees with a stem diameter of 75 mm or more (or in the
trees, tree work and the procedures and costs involved therein. I have undertaken bat case of woodlands or substantial tree groups, only individual trees with stem diameters
greater than 150 mm) are to be recorded. This would normally include any offsite trees
awareness and tree endoscopy training. that overhang the site or are located beyond the site boundaries within a distance of up
to 12 times their estimated stem diameter, but the terms of my instructions tare that
As a licensed and registered user of the Quantified Tree Risk Assessment system, I
offsite trees are not to be included on this occasion.
Julian A Morris record and make recommendations based on objective factors that result in
B Sc, Dip Surv, Cert Pub Sect Man, Tech Cert Arb, PTI proportionate responses to tree risks, minimising unnecessary tree works and expense Where deemed appropriate, individual trees within homogeneous groups will not be
Professional Tree Services while providing a robust basis for meeting the tree owner's duty of care to occupiers and
neighbours.
indentified; instead the group will be delineated, measured and described collectively.
149 Langlea Avenue Generalities - limitations

Cambuslang The survey was carried out in accordance with the Methodology set out in the Appendix
G72 8AN to this report. This report is based on a visual inspection from ground level only.
0141 641 0245 The trees have been assessed on the basis of the endemic weather patterns for the
0778 654 8072 location. No general account can be taken of unseasonable extremes of weather. The
jamorris@mail.com
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN
p 74 p 75
B11
subject of climate change and its possible effects on any trees is outwith the scope of Ground conditions, particularly shrinkable clays, relative to new planting design Investigative Findings and categorisations
this report. and foundation design to take account of retained, removed and new trees are This report has been prepared for the sole use of the client – no other party is entitled to rely or act upon it or to reproduce all or any
beyond the scope of this report. I visited the site and inspected the trees with my technical assistant on two days in April part of it without the express prior written consent of the author. The author cannot be held liable for any third party claim arising.
No intrusive or destructive tests were carried out, the survey did not include exhaustive 2018.
foliar examination (except for purposes of identifying the species) and the inspection
was primarily visual and was conducted from the ground and no climbing was done. The conditions were generally cool, dry, overcast with sunny intervals and little or no The survey identified the presence of one veteran trees on the Govan Old church part
Generalities - Tree categorisation protocols wind. of the site. The implications of their presence on the use of the surrounding land should
The trees have been assessed during two recent visits, with the limitations that this be assessed at the earliest possible stage of the design process. Where such trees are
brings, such as the opportunity to assess the reaction of the tree to a variety of wind The purpose of the tree categorization method, as stated in BS5837, is to identify the There were no access limitations, except for dense undergrowth in the Pearse lane to be retained, particular care should be taken in the design to accommodate them in a
quality and value (in a non-fiscal sense) of the existing tree stock, allowing informed area. setting that aids their long-term retention. They may require more space than non-
strengths and directions or the presence of seasonal fungal Fruiting Bodies.
decisions to be made concerning which trees should be removed or retained in the veteran trees.
Deciduous trees and some conifers carry little or no leaf in winter, reducing the event of development occurring. I was supplied with a digital copy of an incomplete topographic survey, with no base
mapping of the Pearse Lane are and the junction of Napier Road and Govan Road. At Whilst veteran trees typically provide a range of niche habitats, they are especially
information available to assess vitality. Conversely trees in summer carry foliage that
For a tree (or group of trees) to qualify under any given category, it should fall within the these positions tree positions were plotted wither by GPS alone or by chainage and valuable if ancient, due to their scarcity and high habitat values for associated species
can restricts visibility of all its parts. of fungi, lichens and saproxylic invertebrates.
scope of that Trees are categorised (A, B, C or U) by estimated remaining amenity offset from known mapped points. As such the former are likely to be accurate only to ±
Dense basal epicormics and/or ivy on trees, and occasionally dense undergrowth can contribution combined with quality and, for trees in categories A to C, one or more of 1 metre, but the latter can be expected to be accurate to ±0.2metres.
obstruct the full inspection of trees. Only enough to reach a preliminary or final the three subcategories (1, 2, 3) to reflect arboricultural and landscape qualities, and Tree crown constraints
conclusion about any such affected trees will have been removed. cultural values, respectively. Every tree surveyed individually on-site has been affixed with a uniquely numbered tag,
No older tags were found on the trees. The spread of the canopies of the selected trees have generally been estimated at 4
I have not checked with the relevant Local Authority as to the existence of Conservation However, in this instance where designers may be actively considering the benefits of cardinal points. BS5837, though, recognises that "It is not always practical or necessary
Area designation which has the statutory effect of prohibiting certain tree works. Nor trees it is considered unnecessary to make somewhat arbitrary distinctions between A total of around 100 trees on the site were tagged and recorded individually
to record branch spread for every tree in a group.", and following this rationale, only the
have I checked to see if all or any of the trees are also subject to a Tree Preservation arboricultural and landscape values. and the suffix has therefore been omitted unless The investigative findings for the survey stage are summarised in the appendix to this average spread has been given for any individual trees where crowns were found to be
Order which would impose even stricter statutory controls on tree work. Either status any tree was found to have cultural values (Veteran, Ancient or Heritage). report, together with a plot of the position of all the trees and groups (see 'tree crown approximately circular in horizontal spread.
could indicate the Local Authority's position on the importance of the trees to the constraints' below).
amenity of the area and should be adopted (unless and until varied by planning In assessing the merit of the trees and their retention desirability I have not had regard The extent of the crow s is plotted on the first plan appended to this report, colour-
permission or revocation) in preference to the retention desirability expressed in this to any specific design layout, or any other uses than at present. coded to give an immediate overview of their relative retention desirability.
report.
Site description (general) and tree groupings Using all this as a guide, it may be appropriate to define areas within which
development may be constrained by the presence of tree canopy. That said, the crown
The survey covers a number of disparate sites and locations within the town centre and spreads do not fully represent the height at which crowns might constrain development.
Generalities -Soil and other ground conditions the curtilege of Govan Old church. They are grouped by tag numbers as follows
Soil present around the base of trees was not removed and root collars have not been Govan Old church 652 to 665
examined except where, and to the extent, they are already exposed. No sampling, Root protection areas
Water Row and peripheries of car park 666 to 689
examination or analysis of the soil was done. BS5837 suggests that a soil assessment The root protection area indicates the minimum area around a tree deemed to contain
should be undertaken by a competent person to inform any decisions relating to the Curtilege of GCC Financial Services building 690 to 703 sufficient roots and rooting volume to maintain the tree’s viability, and where the
root protection area (RPA), tree protection, new planting design and foundation design protection of the roots and soil structure is treated as a priority.
to take account of retained, removed and new trees. Pearse Lane and perimeter of grassed area 704 to 753
If development is proposed, greatest consideration could be given to retaining Category The extents of the root protection areas are plotted on the second plan appended to this
A and B trees (i.e. generally those with an estimated Remaining Contribution of 20 or report.
General assumptions have been made in the course of the survey about likely ground
conditions, related in part to observations of current tree vitality. Comment on ground more years). I have made the assumption that Category C trees (by definition those Where there was no need to modify the Root Protection Areas of individual trees, the
conditions are restricted to when root and protection matters are likely to be sensitive to having and Estimated Remaining Contribution of 1 to 20 years) are likely to be default circular RPAs suggested by BS5837 have been plotted.
them. exceeded by the design life of the proposed development, and these may be suitable
for retention in low risk or low visibility locations. If and where pre-existing site conditions or other factors indicate that rooting has
occurred asymmetrically influenced by past or existing site conditions (e.g. the
presence of roads, structures and known underground apparatus), a polygon of
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services equivalent area has been produced. In due course this or circular RPAs may need to be
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN modified further due to -
a) unseen underground apparatus, structures etc.;
p 76 Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services p 77

149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN
B11
b) topography and drainage; Conclusions
c) the soil type and structure; All the trees have been recorded and categorised in accordance with BS5837.
d) the likely tolerance of the tree to root disturbance or damage, based on A total of around 100 on-site trees were recorded, measured and plotted.
factors such as species, age, condition and past management 664
All the trees have been categorised for relative retention desirability in accordance with A
654
Where I was unable to plot trees relative to known structures (because of an absence of BS5837. B 658
A
665
B
663
A
base mapping), the modifications to RPAs for these structures is approximate. 662
No checks have been made on statutory restrictions on tree works.
657
A A
Risk reduction recommendations 656

No trees were found that might present an imminent and serious hazard to life or 655 661
B C
B 723 725
0 U 727728
B
No trees were found that might present an imminent and serious hazard to life or property. 660
A 719
C
722 724A B
721
C C CC
720
726 729
C
730731
732
C 734
C C
property. 717718
C 733C 735
B C
This report provides only a baseline for detailed design or tree retention proposals, for 653
659
A
C U
716
715
U
714
738
B740
736
669
B 668
U 739737
741 673 672 B
. which further advice such as tree constraints above and below ground, arboricultural B
652
U
713
712
B
B AA 742
743
B744
745
749BBBB746
B
B747
B748 674
B
C B 671
B
670
C
711C AA 667
impact assessment and/or arboricultural method statements would be recommended as B 710U

709 A 675
B 666
B
C B
development proposals evolve. 708
706 707
B
680
B
676
B
C C
681
705
B 677
704 B
The position of the trees and the extents of their crowns extents (colour coded for B 682
C
678
B
683
relative retention desirability) are represented on the first plan.
B
C
679
1 684 B
753 752
B C
A
The trees have had their RPAs calculated with reference to species, growing 751
685
C
environment and other factors and a representative proportion of these have been B
750
C
plotted, modified from simple circles where known ground conditions require it. These
688
A
are represented on the second plan.

689
One veteran tree was noted, but given a B categorisation due to its limited Estimated B
Remaining Contribution.
686
B
687
C
Tree Number
Julian A. Morris
Root Protection Area
T1
690
B 691 692
Crown Spread B C
Signed
693
Dated April 2018 Category 'A' Category 'B' Category 'C' Category 'U'
B
694
B
0 60m
696695
JulianAMorrisProfessionalTreeServices A B
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang G72 8AN

0141 641 0245 - jamorris@mail.com 697
PROJECT: Govan town centre - tree survey

698
B
B
699
700 A
SCALE : 1 : 1000 @ A4 DATE : 16/04/2018 702
703B 701 B
B B
DRAWING : Categorisations and
crown extents
NOTES : [Notes]
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN The original of this drawing was produced in colour
- a monochrome copy should not be relied upon
Map data may contain Ordnance Survey ® products ‘
p 78 p 79
B11
664
A
654
B 658 665 663
A
APPENDIX 1 - INDIVIDUAL TREES
A B
LOCATION: Govan Town Centre DATE: April 2018
657 662
A A
Tag Species Binomial Stems Dia. Ht. Spread (m) Crown 1st branch Observations Condition Life - ERC Grading Risk/
(mm
656 661 no. (if >1) (m) N E S W ht.(m) ht dir physio. struct. Stage (yrs) action
)
655 B
B C 723 725
0 U 727728
B
722 724A B 729
721 726 Stem leaning north. oval. small
660 C C CC
720 C
730731
732
Common 20 to
Tilia x europaea
719
652 600 23 10 8 3 4 6 7 SW lower stem epicormics. unoccluding Good Fair 4 Mature B
A C C 734
C C
C 733C 735
717718 B C Lime 40 yrs
659
C U
716 738 669 stubs at 2m.
A 715 B740 B 668
653
B
U
714
U
U
713
736
739737
741
B AA 742
743
B744
745
673
C
672
671 670
B Partial girldling roots. small lower
749BBBB746 B
652
712
711C
B
B
B747
B748 674
B
B C
stem epicormics. Stem leaning
B 710U
AA 667
B 666 Common 20 to
709 A 675 B 653 Tilia x europaea 880 27 8 6 5 8 7 7 S slightly north self-corrected. Twin Good Fair 4 Mature B
C B Lime 40 yrs
708
706 707
680 676 stemmed from fair compression
B B B
C C
705
681 fork e-w at 9m
B 677
Superficial stem split to unoccluding
704 B
B 682 B
C Fair- 5 Late- 20 to
683
678
B 654 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 420 14 8 2.5 3 E large crown-lifting wound at 2.5m. Good B
C good mature 40 yrs
1
753 752 684
679
B Balanced crown
B C
A
Flowering Stem decayed and case-hardened. Fair- 10 to
751
685
655 Malus sp. 390 6.5 4 5 5 3 2.5 3 All Fair 4 Mature B3
B
C
Crab gnarly dense crown. poor 20 yrs
750
C
688
A superficial decay on surface root to
north. good upright intact stem and
Fair- 20 to
656 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 510 12 5 5.5 6 5 4 4 SW balanced crown. twin-stemmed Good 4 Mature B
good 40 yrs
689 from good compression fork e-w at
B
2.5m
Minor girdling roots. good upright >40
657 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 620 15 5 9 5 8 4 4 All Good Good 4 Mature A
intact stem and balanced crown yrs
686
B good upright intact stem. Twin-
687
stemmed from good compression >40
Tree Number C
658 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 530 16 5.5 7 5 7 3.5 5 SE Good Good 4 Mature A
fork at 2.5m. Reasonably balanced yrs
Root Protection Area crown
T1
Acer twin-stemmed from long Fair- >40
690
659 Silver Maple 720 19 6 9 5 10 1 5 SW Good 4 Mature A
Crown Spread
B 691
B
692
C saccharinum compression fork ne-sw from 1.5m. good yrs
stem leaning slightly east self-
Acer >40
660 Silver Maple 750 19 9 4 9 9 3 4 E corrected. minor damage on Good Fair 4 Mature A
saccharinum
693
B yrs
Category 'A' Category 'B' Category 'C' Category 'U' surface roots
694 upright stem with small dry basal
B
Swedish Sorbus Fair- 3 Early- 10 to
0 60m 661 220 5.5 5 5 3.5 5 2 2 E cavity. balanced crown. Good C
Whitebeam intermedia good mature 20 yrs
suppresssed from above.
Norway Acer good upright intact stem. >40
JulianAMorrisProfessionalTreeServices
696695
662 470 15 4 7 7 7 2 2 W Good Good 4 Mature A
A B
Maple platanoides reasonably balanced crown yrs
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang G72 8AN Triple-stemmed from fair
0141 641 0245 - jamorris@mail.com Norway Acer Fair- >40
697 663 530 15 4 7 6 7 2 2 NW compression forks at 2.5m. Good 4 Mature A
PROJECT: Govan town centre - tree survey
698
B Maple platanoides good yrs
B balanced crown
699 Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services,
700 A
SCALE : 1 : 1000 @ A4 DATE : 16/04/2018 702
703B 701 B
B B
Page 1 of 8 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN For abbreviations see Glossary
DRAWING : Root protection areas
-
NOTES : [Notes]
The original of this drawing was produced in colour

- a monochrome copy should not be relied upon
Map data may contain Ordnance Survey ® products ‘
p 80 p 81
B11
APPENDIX 1 - INDIVIDUAL TREES APPENDIX 1 - INDIVIDUAL TREES

LOCATION: Govan Town Centre DATE: April 2018 LOCATION: Govan Town Centre DATE: April 2018
Tag Species Binomial Stems Dia. Ht. Spread (m) Crown 1st branch Observations Condition Life - ERC Grading Risk/ Tag Species Binomial Stems Dia. Ht. Spread (m) Crown 1st branch Observations Condition Life - ERC Grading Risk/
(mm (mm
no. (if >1) (m) N E S W ht.(m) ht dir physio. struct. Stage (yrs) action no. (if >1) (m) N E S W ht.(m) ht dir physio. struct. Stage (yrs) action
) )
good upright intact stem. twin- Maturing stem epicormics. balanced >40
678 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 100 5.5 1 1.8 Good Good 1 Young B
Norway Acer stemmed from fair compression Fair- >40 crown yrs
664 400 14 4.5 2.5 2.5 N Good 4 Mature A
Maple platanoides fork with included bark at 2.5m. good yrs Good upright intact stem and >40
679 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 100 5 1 1.8 Good Good 1 Young B
balanced crown balanced crown yrs
Good upright intact stem and >40
balanced crown yrs
>40 Good upright intact stem and >40
665 Black Pine Pinus nigra 110 3.5 1.5 0 0 All Good Good 1 Young B 681 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 5 1 1.9 Good Good 1 Young B
yrs balanced crown yrs
Basal abrasions to bare wood no Fair- Fair- 10 to
682 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 4.5 1 1 1 0.8 1.8 1 Young C
decay yet good poor 20 yrs
Fair upright intact stem and Fair- 2 Semi- >40
666 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 180 6.5 2 2 2 2.5 2 2.5 SW Good B
balanced crown. still staked. good mature yrs
Stem abrasions (dogs). otherwise 683 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 5 1 1.9 1 Young C
Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- >40 decay yet good poor 20 yrs
667 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 180 6.5 2.5 2.5 3 All fair upright intact stem and B
good good mature yrs
balanced crown
Stem abrasions (dogs). otherwise 684 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 5.5 1 2 1 Young C
Fair- 2 Semi- >40 decay yet good poor 20 yrs
668 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 190 6.5 3 2 2.5 All fair upright intact stem and Good B
good mature yrs
balanced crown
Fair upright intact stem and Fair- 2 Semi- >40 685 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 5.5 1 2 1 Young C
669 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 190 6.5 2.5 2 2.5 N Good B decay yet good poor 20 yrs
balanced crown good mature yrs
Stem leaning slightly NE self Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- >40
Major stem abrasions. near- 10 to 686 Whitebeam Sorbus aria 140 5.5 2 2 1 2 2 B
670 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 100 5.5 0.5 2 Fair Good 1 Young C correcting . near-fastigiate crown good good mature yrs
fastigiate form 20 yrs
Major stem abrasions to bare wood Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- 10 to
Fair- >40 687 Whitebeam Sorbus aria 170 6 2 1 1.5 2 2.5 C
671 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 100 5.5 0.6 2 Moderate stem abrasions Good 1 Young B no decay. near fastigiate crown good good mature 20 yrs
good yrs
Good upright intact stem and >40 Well butressed good upright intact
672 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 5.5 0.7 2 Good Good 1 Young B Norway Acer 3 Early- >40
balanced crown yrs 688 410 11 5 2.5 3 S stem and reasonably balanced Good Good A
Maple platanoides mature yrs
crown
Stem leaning NE 20°. leader broken Fair- 20 to
673 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 2 80 3.5 2 1.5 0.5 0 0.5 Fair 1 Young C Well butressed good upright intact
off. good 40 yrs Norway Acer Fair- Fair- >40
689 450 10 6 6 6 5 2.5 3 S stem. fire damage and large limb 4 Mature B
Maple platanoides good good yrs
Minor stem abrasions . balanced Fair- >40 breakage in central crown.
674 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 90 4.5 1 2 Good 1 Young B
crown good yrs Extensive disruption of paving
Fair upright intact stem and Fair- >40 Norway Acer slabs. good upright intact stem. Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 20 to
675 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 100 5.5 0.7 2 Good 1 Young B 690 400 8 6 6 2 3.5 2.5 3 N B
balanced crown good yrs Maple platanoides several long pruning or breakage good good mature 40 yrs
Good upright intact stem and >40 stubs
balanced crown yrs Disruption of slabs and kerbs. good
Norway Acer Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 20 to
Good upright intact stem and >40 691 390 7 6 5 7 6 3 2.5 S upright intact stem. poor crown B
677 Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana 110 5.5 1 1.8 Good Good 1 Young B Maple platanoides good good mature 40 yrs
balanced crown yrs lifting wounds.
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services, Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services,
Page 2 of 8 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN For abbreviations see Glossary Page 3 of 8 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN For abbreviations see Glossary
p 82 p 83
B11

(mm (mm
) )
London Platanus x Disruption of slabs. large old tear Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 10 to Fair- Fair- 10 to
692 350 7 5 4 4 5 2.5 4 N C 706 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 150 4 0 3 5 3 2 3 SW Crown leaning sw over fence. 1 Young C
Plane hispanica wound at 2m good good mature 20 yrs good good 20 yrs
Good upright intact stem and Fair- 2 Semi- 20 to Norway Acer Large stem abrasion. imbalanced Fair- 10 to
693 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 200 5.5 4 2.5 2 4 2.5 2.5 NW Good B 707 190 6 1 1 4 4 2 Fair 1 Young C
reasonably balanced crown good mature 40 yrs Maple platanoides crown to the west good 20 yrs
Well butressed good upright intact Norway Acer Almost girdled by rope at 1m (now Fair- 3 Early- >40
Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- 20 to 708 400 9.5 3 5 5 5 2 2.5 W Good B
694 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 250 5.5 4 3 3 S stem. several recent poor crown B Maple platanoides removed). balanced crown good mature yrs
good good mature 40 yrs
lifting wounds
Norway Acer 50% bark absent to 2m. no decay. 2 Semi- 10 to
Twin stemmed from fair 709 260 7.5 2 4 3 3 2 2 W Fair Fair C
Maple platanoides inrolled callus. mature 20 yrs
compression fork with included 2 Semi- 20 to
695 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 2 210 8 3 3 3 2 2.5 Fair Fair B
bark at 0.2m. recent poor crown mature 40 yrs White Twin stemmed from good fork at 3 Early- >40
710 Salix alba 450 11 4 6 5 5 3 5 W Good Good A
lifting wounds Willow 3m. balanced crown mature yrs
Good upright intact stem and 2 Semi- >40 White 2 Semi- <10
696 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 200 7.5 3 2 3 All Good Good A 711 Salix alba 200 6 2 2 1 2 4 Snapped at 4m Poor Poor U
balanced crown mature yrs Willow mature yrs
Good upright intact stem and Triple stemmed from basal
Fair- 2 Semi- >40
697 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 200 6 3.5 3 2 3 3 3 SW reasonably balanced crown with Good B White compression forks with included 3 Early- 10 to
good mature yrs 712 Salix alba 3 390 8 4 3 0 3 3 Fair Fair C
recent poor crown lifting wounds Willow bark. 2 substems snapped off at mature 20 yrs
Good upright intact stem. twin 4m.
Fair- 2 Semi- >40
698 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 190 6 2 3 3 3 3 3 W stemmed from good fork at 2m. Good B Prunus Twin stemmed from base and Fair- Fair- 3 Early- >40
good mature yrs 713 Plum 2 220 6 3 2 B
poor crown lifting wounds domestica spreading. good good mature yrs
Good upright intact stem and Fair- 3 Early- >40
699 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 220 7 4 3.5 3 N Good A White 3 related trees. all decayed at base. Fair- 3 Early- 10 to
reasonably balanced crown good mature yrs 714 Salix alba 3 325 9 4 4 3 4.5 2.5 Poor U
Willow several tops broken off around 4m. poor mature 20 yrs
Good upright intact stem and
Fair- 2 Semi- >40
700 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 180 6 3.5 3 2 3.5 3 3 All balanced crown. poor crown lifting Good B White 50% bark loss and shallow decay at Fair- 2 Semi- <10
good mature yrs 715 Salix alba 200 7 2.5 3 Fair U
wounds Willow base. top lost at 5m poor mature yrs
Good upright intact stem and
Fair- 2 Semi- >40 White Fair- 2 Semi- 10 to
701 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 200 6.5 2 4 3 2 3 2.5 E reasonably balanced crown. poor Good B 716 Salix alba 190 7.5 3 2 1 4 3 4 W As 715 Fair U
good mature yrs Willow poor mature 20 yrs
recent crown lifting wounds
Fair upright intact stem. Fair- Fair- 3 Early- >40
702 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 250 6 3.5 2 2 4 3 4 W B Imbalanced crown to the west over 10 to
imbalanced crown to the north. good good mature yrs 717 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 4 250 5.5 3 1 2.5 3 2 4 W Fair Fair 1 Young C
fence 20 yrs
Decaying stubs of matured
3 Early- 20 to
703 Wild Cherry Prunus avium 390 6.5 3.5 4 5 4.5 3.5 3 S epicormics. several poor crown Fair Good B Large stem abrasion around 1m.
mature 40 yrs White 2 Semi- 10 to
lifting wounds. balanced crown 718 Salix alba 290 10 4 4 5 All regeneration of crown from leader Fair Fair U
Willow mature 20 yrs
Portugese Prunus >40 loss at 5m
704 6<10 300 7 0 2.5 4 2.5 0.5 1 S Portugese. no crown to north Good Good 4 Mature B
Laurel lusitanica yrs
10 to
twin stemmed from compression 719 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 3 170 8 4 2 3 E Imbalanced crown to the east Good Good 1 Young C
Norway Acer Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- 20 to 20 yrs
705 2 300 8 3.5 2 2.5 All fork at base. Ratchet strap B
Maple platanoides good good mature 40 yrs
strangling substem.
p 84 p 85
B11

(mm (mm
) )
10 to Norway Acer Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 10 to
720 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 140 7 2.5 1 Good Good 1 Young C 734 250 11 4 1 1 S Stem partially buried. C
20 yrs Maple platanoides good good mature 20 yrs
European Fair upright intact stem . high Fair- Fair- 20 to European Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- 20 to
721 Larix decidua 140 12 1.5 1.5 3 2.5 8.5 1 Young C 735 Larix decidua 160 7.5 2.5 5 2.5 N C
Larch crown good good 40 yrs Larch good good mature 40 yrs
European Fair upright intact stem . high Fair- Fair- 20 to Multi stemmed from base. shallow Fair- Fair- 20 to
722 Larix decidua 170 12 2 2 3 2 8.5 1 Young C 736 Field Maple Acer campestre 5 400 10 4 2.5 4 4 1.5 2.5 S 4 Mature B
Larch crown good good 40 yrs decay west. good good 40 yrs
Stem abrasion no decay and
Common Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 20 to Fair- Fair- 3 Early- >40
723 Corylus avellana 6<10 220 7.5 3 1.5 dense Group of related stems B 737 Field Maple Acer campestre 200 9 0 3 3 3 1.5 2 S occluding. slightly imbalanced B
Hazel good good mature 40 yrs good good mature yrs
crown to south
Good upright intact stem and 2 Semi- >40
Fair- 10 to 738 Field Maple Acer campestre 200 9 3 1.5 Good Good B
724 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 2 190 11 0 4 5.5 1.5 3 3 SE Twin stemmed from base Good 1 Young C reasonably balanced crown mature yrs
good 20 yrs
Good upright intact stem and 2 Semi- >40
739 Field Maple Acer campestre 180 9.5 2 3 3 3 1.5 Good Good A
European reasonably balanced crown mature yrs
725 Larix decidua 150 5 Pole Dead Dead n/a U
Larch Twin stemmed from 1m. slightly 3 Early- >40
740 Field Maple Acer campestre 2 260 9.5 3 3 2 3 2 3 N Good Good A
imbalanced crown to the north mature yrs
Triple stemmed from base . Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- 10 to
726 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 3 220 9 0 4 5 0 0.5 5 E C European Good upright intact stem and Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- >40
imbalanced crown to the east good good mature 20 yrs 741 Larix decidua 170 10 2 8 B
Larch balanced crown good good mature yrs
Norway Acer Good upright intact stem and 3 Early- >40 Twin stemmed from good fork at
727 380 12 6 3 2.5 W Good Good A 2 Semi- >40
Maple platanoides reasonably balanced crown mature yrs 742 Field Maple Acer campestre 2 190 8.5 0.5 2 2 2 1.8 1m. slightly imbalanced crown to Good Good B
mature yrs
Common Small diameter deadwood around Fair- Fair- 3 Early- >40 south
728 Tilia x europaea 300 13 4 3.5 4 E B
Lime 5m. good good mature yrs European Good upright intact stem and Fair- Fair- 2 Semi- >40
743 Larix decidua 180 11 2.5 8 B
Larch balanced crown good good mature yrs
Common Fair- 2 Semi- 10 to
729 Tilia x europaea 230 12 3 2.5 2 S 60% bark loss around 1m. Fair C Twin stemmed from good fork at
Lime poor mature 20 yrs 2 Semi- >40
744 Field Maple Acer campestre 2 200 9 2 3 3 3 1.7 1m. slightly imbalanced crown to Good Good B
mature yrs
south
10 to
730 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 2 200 9 0 1 4 1 0.5 2 S Stem and crown leaning south Good Good 1 Young C 2 Semi- >40
20 yrs 745 Field Maple Acer campestre 150 9 2 1.8 1 S Good Good B
mature yrs
Stem and crown leaning slightly 2 Semi- >40
2 related trees leaning slightly 10 to 746 Field Maple Acer campestre 2 190 9 2 2 2.5 NE Good Good B
731 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 4 180 9 0 2.5 3 1.5 2.5 Good Good 1 Young C north east mature yrs
south east 20 yrs
3 Early- >40
747 Field Maple Acer campestre 180 8.5 2.5 2 2.5 SW Good Good A
mature yrs
Twin stemmed from fair 2 Semi- 10 to
732 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 3 200 12 3 3.5 4 3.5 0.5 3 E Good Good C 3 Early- >40
compression fork at 0.5m mature 20 yrs 748 Field Maple Acer campestre 2 200 8.5 1 2 2.5 2 2.5 2.5 S Slightly imbalanced crown south Good Good A
mature yrs
2 Semi- 20 to Multi stemmed from base and Fair- Fair- 20 to
733 Wych Elm Ulmus glabra 200 10 1.5 3 4 3 2 2 S Good Good B 749 Goat Willow Salix caprea 6<10 480 10 2 6 6 4.5 0.5 1 SE 4 Mature B
mature 40 yrs related stems spreading. good good 40 yrs
p 86 p 87
B11
APPENDIX 2 - GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Acceptable - see 'Risk Category'

Adaptive growth: An increase in wood production in localised areas in response to a decrease
in wood strength or external loading to maintain an even distribution of forces across the
structure.
APPENDIX 1 - INDIVIDUAL TREES Adventitious/epicormic growth: New growth arising from dormant or new buds directly from
LOCATION: Govan Town Centre DATE: April 2018 main branches/stems or trunks.
Tag Species Binomial Stems Dia. Ht. Spread (m) Crown 1st branch Observations Condition Life - ERC Grading Risk/
Bracing: The installation of cables, ropes and/or belts to reduce the probability of failure of one
or more parts of the tree structure due to weakened elements under excessive movement.
(mm
no. (if >1) (m) N E S W ht.(m) ht dir physio. struct. Stage (yrs) action Callus: Undifferentiated tissue initiated as a result of wounding and which become specialised
)
tissues of the repair over time.
Stem bark split to 2m becoming
Cavity: A void within the solid structure of the tree, normally associated with decay or
Norway Acer inrolled only superficial decay. Fair- Fair- 3 Early- 10 to
750 400 12 4 5 4 1.5 2.5 4 E C deterioration of the woody tissues.
Maple platanoides crown imbalanced slightly to the good good mature 20 yrs
Co-dominant stems: Two or more, generally upright, stems of roughly equal size and vigour
east
competing with each other for dominance.
White Hidstoric partial windthrow self 20 to Conservation Area: A designation made under the Planning Acts in the interest of preserving
751 Salix alba 930 18 8 2.5 4 SW Good Fair 4 Mature B
Willow corrected . multi stemmed from 2m 40 yrs or enhancing the special architectural or historic character or appearance of an area, making it
an offence except in specific circumstances to carry out work to or remove a tree, or to wilfully
Betula Good upright intact stem and 3 Early- >40
752 Downy Birch
pubescens
200 10 2 1.8 3 N
balanced crown
Good Good
mature yrs
A damage or destroy it, with prior written notification to the Local Planning Authority
Basal abrasions to bare wood no
Crown: The foliage bearing section of the tree formed by its branches and not including any
Betula Fair- Fair- 20 to clear stem/trunk.
753 Downy Birch 2 310 10 3.5 3 2 3 1 2 S decay. slight initial lean north self 4 Mature B
pubescens good good 40 yrs Crown Lifting: The removal of the lowest branches and/or preparing of lower branches for
corrected
future removal.
Crown Reduction: The reduction in height and/or spread of the crown (the foliage bearing
portions) of a tree.
Crown Spreads: The extent of the live crown, measured from the centre of the base of the
canopy, in each of the four cardinal points (in the order north, east, south, west)
Crown Thinning: The removal of a portion of smaller/tertiary branches, usually at the outer
crown, to produce a uniform density of foliage around an evenly spaced branch structure.
Condition:
Good Generally free from defects and in good health
Fair Reasonably healthy but defects are present that may adversely affect
Estimated Remaining Contribution but that may be addressed in the short
term by minor intervention
Poor In decline and/or defective requiring major intervention
Dead No signs of life or so little that death is inevitable
Decline: Lack of vitality such as reduced leaf size, colour or density.
Diameter: More fully known as Diameter at Breast Height (1.5m). See Methodology
Dormant: The inactive condition of a tree, usually during the coldest months of the year when
there is little or no growth and leaves of deciduous trees have been shed.
Dieback: No signs of life on branch tips due to age or external influences.
Duty of Care: the common law and Occupier’s Liability Acts law which can be paraphrased as
such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that a person will not
suffer injury or damage by reason of any danger (which is due to the state of the premises) and
to prevent or minimize the known risk of damage or injury to one’s neighbour or to his property.
Epicormic Growth: See Adventitious Growth
Estimated Remaining Contribution: This is the contribution in years that the tree in
substantially its current form (or better) is expected to continue to make an arboricultural or
landscape contribution. This may or may not be the equivalent to the biological life expectancy,
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services, often being shorter than the latter because any tree may become so diseased or dangerous as
Page 8 of 8 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN For abbreviations see Glossary to present an unacceptable risk if it is left standing. However, it may be longer than the latter if
the tree might remain alive even if cut to the ground, and continue to live for a considerable
time. Also referred to in BS5837 less meaningfully as 'estimated remaining life expectancy'

p 88 p 89
B11
40+ years corresponding with BS 5837 40+ years
20 to 40 years corresponding with BS 5837 20+ years
10 to 20 years corresponding with BS 5837 10+ years APPENDIX 3 - SURVEY METHODOLOGY APPENDIX 4 - FULLER CITATION OF TEXTS IF REFERRED TO
0 to 10 years corresponding with BS5837 less than 10 years
Fruiting bodies: The fruiting body is the spore bearing, reproductive structure of that fungus. Each tree is inspected initially from a distance to ensure closer inspection would be Strouts and Winter (1994) Diagnosis of ill-health in trees
Life Stage:
safe. Each tree qualifying to be recorded is tagged sequentially with a uniquely
NP newly planted Not fully established and capable of being transplanted or
numbered aluminium tag, nailed to the tree with an alloy nail as near as practicable on Mattheck and Breloer (1994) – The body language of trees
easily replaced
Y Young Establishing, usually with good vigour the north of the main stem at around 1.8 metres above ground level.
EM Early mature Established, usually vigorous and increasing in height Roberts, Jackson and Smith (2006) – Tree Roots in the Built Environment
M Mature Fully established around half their species’ life expectancy, The height is estimated by (i) measuring a fixed distance from the base equal to at least
generally good vigour and achieving full height potential but the height of the tree (ii) by the use of a clinometer the angles to the top and bottom of British Standards Institute (2011) – BS3998: Recommendations for tree work
crown still spreading the tree are noted and (iii) by trigonometry the height of the tree is calculated
LM Late mature Moderate vigour, no additional height expected and growth British Standards Institute (2012) – BS5837: Trees in relation to design, demolition and
rate slowing Distances are measured using calibrated paces, adjusted where necessary for the construction - Recommendations.
OM Over-mature Fully mature, in last quarter of life expectancy, vigour terrain. Diameters of stem are measured using a diameter tape which measures
decreasing circumference (‘girth’) and gives the equivalent average diameter. Where trees are Johnson and Moore (2004) – Collins Tree Guide
V Veteran See Veteran definition multistemmed from below 1.5m, either the diameter at a lower representative point, or
A Ancient Beyond maturity, old in comparison with other trees of the same
species; showing Veteran (see below) values and characteristics
the equivalent stem diameter of the total cross sectional area calculated at breast White, John and Forestry Commission (1998) - Estimating the Age of Large and
because of age rather than past events height, is given. All diameter measurements are taken in accordance with BS5837, Veteran Trees in Britain' - Forestry Commission Information Note
Planning Acts: Primary Planning legislation in Scotland relevant to trees and their protection, unless otherwise stated.
principally the Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act Schwartze, Engels and Mattheck (2000) - Fungal Strategies of Wood Decay in Trees
2006 and The Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation Order and Trees in Conservation The tree species is identified from knowledge supported by Johnson and Moore (see
Areas) (Scotland) Regulations 2010. Fuller Citation at Appendix 5) using bark, buds, twigs, fruit, flowers, form and habit. Mynors (2002) – The Law of Trees, Forests and Hedgerows
Pollard: The removal of the top of a young tree at a prescribed height to encourage multistem
branching from that point, repeated on a cyclical basis always retaining the initial pollard point. Binoculars are used where appropriate to examine visible features and structures above Health & Safety Executive (2001) - Reducing Risk, Protecting People
Quality/Value Category: As defined and used by BS5837 5 metres in height. A hand lens is used to examine small features and to help narrow
A Trees of high quality and value down the list of possible species of any pathogen growths on the tree. Helliwell per Arboricultural Association (2008) – Guidance Note 4: Visual Amenity
B Trees of moderate quality and value
C Trees of low quality and value
Valuation of Trees and Woodlands
1 Mainly Arboricultural values
The position of trees is captured on site using a Geographic Information System and the
trees' attributes are recorded as a map layer. These are brought into the report as an British Standards Institute (2008) – BS8206-2: Lighting for buildings. Code of practice
2 Mainly landscape values
3 Mainly cultural values, including conservation Excel spreadsheet, and into the tree survey plan as set of vector layers for processing for daylighting
Retrenchment pruning: A form of reduction intended to encourage development of lower and use. The position of trees is modified manually where there are clear discrepancies.
shoots and emulate the natural process of tree aging. The data includes a 16 digit Ordnance Survey grid reference, but care should be taken Littlefair, Paul, BRE (2011) – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight
Risk Category: In accordance with the Health & Safety Executive’s general parameters in relying on this figure for anything other than indicative relative position; the strength
Lower than 1:1,000,000 ‘Acceptable’ and position of satellite signals used by GPS is variable in quantity, strength and quality, British Standards Institute (2015) BS8596 Surveying for bats in trees and woodland –
Between 1:1,000,000 and 1:10,000 ‘Tolerable’ for Involuntary Risk and reflections from buildings, fences or vehicles can result in aberrations. Generally guide
Between 1:10,000 and 1:1,000 'Tolerable' for Voluntary Risk 1.5 metre accuracy is achieved.
Higher than 1:1,000 ‘Unacceptable’
British Standards Institute (2015) Microguide to surveying for bats in trees and
Root Protection Area (RPA) layout design tool indicating the minimum area around a tree
Whilst it is not possible without laboratory examination and testing to confirm definitive woodland
deemed to contain sufficient roots and rooting volume to maintain the tree’s viability, and
where the protection of the roots and soil structure is treated as a priority
identifications of pests, diseases and fungal infections, all reasonable attempts are
Species: Unless otherwise stated the Linnaean binomial name of the species is stated for the made to eliminate possibilities and in most cases a species or genus or a common Statutory Nature Conservation Organisations/ Bat Conservation Trust (2015) – Method
avoidance of any ambiguity arising from varying usage of common names. name can be state with a reasonable degree of confidence that the implications arising Statement for the Appropriate Use of Endoscopes by Arborists
Tree Preservation Order: An Order made under the Planning Acts in the interests of the from the identification will be appropriate to the other outcomes of the report such as
amenity of an area making it an offence except in specific circumstances to carry out work to or risk assessment, recommendations and life expectancy.
remove a tree, or to wilfully damage or destroy it, with prior written consent from the Local
Planning Authority Soundings will be taken either with a rubber mallet or a nylon-tipped hammer to
Veteran: A survivor that has developed some of the habitat features such as wounds or decay ascertain the existence and likely extent of cavities or other invisible decay.
found on an ancient tree, not necessarily as a consequence of time, but of past events or its
environment. It may look old relative to other trees of the same species. Such trees may be Cavities will be inspected visually with a torch only insofar as this is reasonably possible
valued, notwithstanding risk, for their character, ecological, historic or cultural significance. from the ground, removing only enough of loose material as is necessary to reach
Vitality: The degree of physiological and biochemical processes (life functions) within a tree.
conclusions about the extent and nature of decay or defects.
Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services Julian A Morris Professional Tree Services
149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN 149 Langlea Avenue, Cambuslang, G72 8AN
p 90 p 91
B12
RSK GENERAL NOTES CONTENTS
Flood Risk Analysis
Project No.: 881325-R1(03)-FRA 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 3
Site: Water Row, Govan 2 CONTEXT AND SCOPE OF WORK................................................................................................ 5
Title: Flood Risk Assessment 3 SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................ 6
Client: Govan Housing Association Limited 3.1 Location .................................................................................................................................... 6
Date: July 2018 3.2 Land use and topography ......................................................................................................... 7
Office: Wigan 3.3 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................8
Status: Draft 3.4 Geology .................................................................................................................................... 8
4 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ....................................................................................................... 9
5 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT ...................................................................................... 10
5.1 National policy ........................................................................................................................10
Author K Jackson Technical reviewer C Whittingham
5.2 Flood risk management duties ...............................................................................................13
5.3 Local policy and Guidance .....................................................................................................13
6 SOURCES OF INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 18
Signature Signature
6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................18
Date: July 2018 Date: July 2018 6.2 SEPA flood zone maps ..........................................................................................................18
6.3 Relevant studies .....................................................................................................................19
6.4 Drainage .................................................................................................................................19
6.5 Glasgow City Council response .............................................................................................20
Project manager C Whittingham Project Director I Clark
7 SOURCES OF FLOOD RISK ......................................................................................................... 21
7.1 Criteria ....................................................................................................................................21
7.2 Flooding from rivers / coastal .................................................................................................21
Signature Signature 7.3 Flooding from the land (overland pluvial flood risk) ................................................................23
Date: July 2018 Date: July 2018 7.4 Flooding from groundwater ....................................................................................................24
7.5 Flooding from sewers .............................................................................................................24
Govan Housing Association Limited
7.6 Flooding from Canals .............................................................................................................25
Date Reviewed Approved
Issue No Version/Details Author 7.7 Historic flooding ......................................................................................................................25
issued by by
Water Row, Govan 00

01
Draft for internal comment
Draft for client comment
04.04.18
06.04.18
KJ
KJ
CW
CW
CW
CW
7.8 Flood risk resulting from the development .............................................................................26
7.9 Flood risk summary ................................................................................................................26
8 PLANNING CONTEXT ................................................................................................................... 27
02 Updated draft for comment 27.04.18 KJ CW CW
Flood Risk Assessment rd 8.1 Application of planning policy .................................................................................................27

Updated following 3 Party
03 12.07.18 KJ CW CW 8.2 Risk Framework......................................................................................................................27
Review
9 FLOOD MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................... 30
9.1 Context ...................................................................................................................................30
881325-R1(03)-FRA 9.2 Development Finished Floor Levels and Flood resilient construction ....................................30
9.3 Evacuation and egress ...........................................................................................................30
RSK LDE Ltd (RSK) has prepared this report for the sole use of the client, showing reasonable skill and care, for the intended purposes as
stated in the agreement under which this work was completed. The report may not be relied upon by any other party without the express 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 31
agreement of the client and RSK. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report.
Where any data supplied by the client or from other sources have been used, it has been assumed that the information is correct. No
responsibility can be accepted by RSK for inaccuracies in the data supplied by any other party. The conclusions and recommendations in this
report are based on the assumption that all relevant information has been supplied by those bodies from whom it was requested.
APPENDICES
No part of this report may be copied or duplicated without the express permission of RSK and the party for whom it was prepared.
APPENDIX A – Service Constraints
Where field investigations have been carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to achieve the stated objectives of the
work. APPENDIX B – Topographic Survey
This work has been undertaken in accordance with the quality management system of RSK LDE Ltd. APPENDIX C – Masterplan Site Boundary
Govan Housing Association Limited Govan Housing Association Limited 1

JULY 2018 Water Row, Govan Water Row, Govan
Flood Risk Assessment Flood Risk Assessment
881325-R1(03)-FRA 881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 92 p 93
B12
APPENDIX D – Scottish Water Sewer Records  A flood risk assessment and drainage impact assessment has been requested by
APPENDIX E – Glasgow City Council Correspondence the client.
1 INTRODUCTION The comments given in this report and opinions expressed are subject to RSK Group
2 CONTEXT AND SCOPE OF WORK
Service Constraints provided in Appendix A.
RSK Land and Development Engineering Ltd (RSK) was commissioned to carry out a A key element of project development is to prepare a FRA to establish the flood risk
Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) by Scott Bennett Associates on behalf of Govan Housing associated with the proposed development and to propose suitable mitigation, if
Association Limited (the ‘client’). The assessment is in support of the planning required, to reduce the risk to a more acceptable level.
submission for a residential scheme (the ‘site’) at Water Row, Govan, Glasgow. The scope of work relating to a FRA is based on the guidance provided in SPP and its
The assessment has been prepared in accordance with the National Planning accompanying guidance.
Framework (NPF)1 and the Scottish Planning Policy2, the Interim Code of Practice for A site-specific FRA must demonstrate that the development will be safe for its lifetime
Sustainable Drainage3, BS 8533-2011 Assessing and Managing Flood Risk in taking account of the vulnerability of its users, without increasing flood risk elsewhere,
Development Code of Practice4 and the Non-statutory technical standards for and, where possible, will reduce flood risk overall. The scope of this assessment
sustainable drainage systems5, with site-specific advice from the Scottish Environment therefore comprises the following elements:
Protection Agency (SEPA), Glasgow City Council (GCC), the architect and the client.
 To review architect plans, planning information and other studies to determine
SPP sets out the criteria for development and flood risk by stating that inappropriate existing site conditions;
development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development
 To obtain information on the hydrology and hydrological regime in and around the
away from areas at highest risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe
site;
without increasing flood risk elsewhere.
 To obtain the views of the SEPA and Glasgow City Council (where applicable)
The SPP notes that:
including scope, location and impacts;
 a precautionary approach to flood risk from all sources, including coastal, water
 To determine the extent of new flooding provision and the influence on the site;
course (fluvial), surface water (pluvial), groundwater, reservoirs and drainage
systems (sewers and culverts), taking account of the predicted effects of climate  To assess the impact on the site from anticipated increases in rainfall over a 200
change; year period for residential uses; and
 flood avoidance: by safeguarding flood storage and conveying capacity, and  To prepare a report including calculations and summaries of the source information
locating development away from functional flood plains and medium to high risk and elements reviewed.
areas;
.
 flood reduction: assessing flood risk and, where appropriate, undertaking natural
and structural flood management measures, including flood protection, restoring
natural features and characteristics, enhancing flood storage capacity, avoiding the
construction of new culverts and opening existing culverts where possible; and
 avoidance of increased surface water flooding through requirements for
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and minimising the area of impermeable
surface.
For this site, the key aspects that require the assessment are:
 The SEPA flood zone map and Glasgow City Council correspondence shows that
sections of the site are located within the fluvial / coastal flood zone; and
1
The Scottish Government (2014), National Planning Framework 3.
2
The Scottish Government (2014), ‘Scottish Planning Policy
3
DEFRA (2004), ‘Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems’ National SUDS Working Group,
July 2004.
4
BSI (2011), ‘BS 8533-2011 Assessing and managing flood risk in development Code of practice’.
5
DEFRA (2015), ‘Sustainable Drainage Systems, Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage
systems’.
Govan Housing Association Limited 2 Govan Housing Association Limited 3 Govan Housing Association Limited 4 Govan Housing Association Limited 5
Water Row, Govan Water Row, Govan Water Row, Govan Water Row, Govan
Flood Risk Assessment Flood Risk Assessment Flood Risk Assessment Flood Risk Assessment
881325-R1(03)-FRA 881325-R1(03)-FRA 881325-R1(03)-FRA 881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 94 p 95
B12
Levels in the area of scrubland immediately west of Water Row are shown in the region
3 SITE DESCRIPTION
of 6mAOD to 6.5mAOD.
4 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
Levels in the existing area of parking to the east of Water Row are shown to fall from
6.2mAOD in the southern sections to 5.8mAOD in the northern areas.
3.1 Location The proposed development is a residential led development for the Phase 1 location
Levels in the areas along the banks of the River Clyde (footpath / cycleway) are shown and a mixed used development for the wider site area. The masterplan site boundary is
Site Name: Water Row, Govan. to range from 4.5mAOD in the eastern areas to 3.2mAOD in the western areas (north of included as Appendix C.
the Church) of parking to the east of Water Row are shown to fall from 6.2mAOD in the
Site Address: Land at Water Row, Govan, Glasgow, G51 3UW.
southern sections to 5.8mAOD in the northern areas.
Site National Grid Reference: (E) 255441 (N) 665858 A copy of the topographic survey and site layout is included as Appendix B.
The site is approximately 2.5ha in size (Phase 1 – 1.31ha) and is located approximately
3km to the west of Glasgow city centre.
3.3 Hydrology
Table 3.1: Site setting
The closest watercourse to the site is the River Clyde which is located adjacent to the
northern boundary of the site.
Direction Characteristic
The River Kelvin flows into the Clyde on its northern bank (adjacent to the Riverside
North By the River Clyde Museum) at this location.
By residential properties off the Napier estate with the Govan Dry
East
Docks / River Clyde beyond.
3.4 Geology
By residential / commercial properties off Govan Road, with further
South Based on the British Geological Survey6 online mapping for the area, the site exhibits
commercial and industrial properties beyond.
the following geology,
By Govan Old Parish Church with residential properties and industrial  Split superficial geology
West
units (BAE Systems) beyond.
o Superficial Geology: Alluvium – Clay, Silt, Sand and Gravel: includes
Figure 3.1 shows a Site Location plan. normally soft to firm consolidated, compressible silty clay, but can contain
layers of silt, sand, peat and basal gravel. A stronger, desiccated surface
zone may be present.
o Superficial Geology: Superficial Deposits - Sediment – any deposit, natural
Figure 3.1: Site location plan or man-made, overlying bedrock (eastern boundary only).
o Base rock Geology: Limestone Coal Formation – Sedimentary Rock Cycles,
Clackmannan Group: includes coal seams.
3.2 Land use and topography There are several accessible borehole records via the BGS web service available within
the site boundary undertaken as part of the Riverside Feasibility Study. The borehores
The site is currently highly varied and contains, Water Row, parking areas, grass /
range in depth with a variation generally between 1 and 10m depths.
scrubland, a temporary residential compound and sections of the banks of the River
Clyde. Available aerial mapping dates back to 2002 and there appears to be little The boreholes in the area appear to record similar strata beneath the made ground,
change in land use between that date and the present day aside from improvements to typically 1-2m of clays overlying dense sands and gravels.
the waterfront, Water Row and the parking area.
Groundwater levels were recorded in several of the borehole records undertaken as
A topographic survey has been provided for the site by the Client and shows that the part of the Riverside Feasibility Study. The groundwater levels in the boreholes range
levels in the area generally fall towards the Clyde. from ca. 2.5mbgl to 8mbgl, with stated ground levels in the logs predominantly recorded
Levels in the area of the show person compound are shown in the region of 5.43mAOD in the region of 5.4mAOD to 5.6mAOD.
to 5.70mAOD, falling towards the area of Water Row. The borehole logs also note the presence of an underground railway tunnel crossing
beneath the site.
Levels in the scrubland areas (directly to the east of the Govan Old Parish Church)
range from approximately 8.3mAOD in the southern sections to 5.6mAOD in the
6
northern sections. British Geological Survey online mapping, available at http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html
p 96 p 97
B12
The purpose of the SPP is to set out national planning policies The National Flood Risk Assessment introduced a risk based 5.2 Flood risk management duties
5 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT which reflect Scottish Ministers’ priorities for operation of the
planning system and for the development and use of land. The SPP
approach to assessing flood risk in Scotland. The assessment
found that 1 in 13 of all non residential properties and 1 in 22 of all 5.2.1 Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)
promotes consistency in the application of policy across Scotland National Flood Risk residential properties are at risk of flooding. The assessment SEPA, as the environmental regulator for Scotland, have duties under the Flood Risk
5.1 National policy whilst allowing sufficient flexibility to reflect local circumstances. It Assessment allowed a targeted response to be made from flood risk Management Act (FRMA) to coordinate and facilitate approaches to flood risk
directly relates to: 2011 8 management in the areas that would have the greatest impact.
management. These duties include:
Table 5.1: National legislation and policy context
 the preparation of development plans; The risk based assessment identified key categories and receptors
in order to determine areas at the highest risk; human health,  Working with Scottish Government to implement the FRMA;
 the design of development, from initial concept through to
Legislation Key provisions economic activity, the environment and cultural heritage.  Development and maintenance of flood risk and hazard maps for Scotland;
delivery; and
Scotland's third National Planning Framework (NPF3) sets out a  the determination of planning applications and appeals. A Bill to make provision for the development of Scotland’s water  Providing advice and information and flood advice to Local Authorities
long term vision for the development of Scotland. SPP develops a Risk Framework that characterises areas for resources; to bring large-scale water abstraction under Ministerial
 Coordinating and facilitating the development of plans to manage to manage the risk of
The aims of planning policy on development and flood risk are to planning purposes by their annual probability of flooding and gives control; to extend Scottish Water’s functions and to authorise grants
flooding in Scotland;
ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the the following planning response: Water Resources and loans in favour of related bodies; to permit the taking of steps
planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at Scottish Planning  Little or no risk area – less than 0.1% annual risk (1:1000 (Scotland ) Act for the sake of water quality; to create contracts for certain non-  Encouraging and facilitating the public and interested organisations to be a part of the
risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas at Policy (2014) event) – no general constraints 20139 domestic water and sewerage services; to protect the public process; and
National Planning
Framework 3 highest risk. sewerage network from harm and to allow for maintenance of
 Low to medium risk area – 0.1% to 0.5% (1:1000 – 1:200) –  Ensuring that sustainable measures are taken and choosing which measures should be
(2014) Where new development is, exceptionally, necessary in such areas, private sewage works; to enable the making of water shortage
suitable for most development but not essential civil prioritised.
policy aims to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere orders; and for connected purposes.
infrastructure such as hospitals, fire stations, emergency
and where possible, reducing flood risk overall. depots, schools, ground based electrical and
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires all inland and
NPF3 will be taken into account in all strategic and local telecommunications equipments; and
development plans in Scotland. Fourteen national developments
coastal waters to reach ‘good’ chemical and biological status by 5.3 Local policy and Guidance
 Medium to high risk area – 0.5% (1:200) or greater – in built up 2015. Flood risk management is unlikely to have a significant
across Scotland are identified to deliver the strategy. areas with flood prevention measures most brown field Local policies ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning
impact on chemical water quality except where maintenance works
development should be acceptable for essential civil disturb sediment (such as de-silting) or where pollutants are process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and making
infrastructure; undeveloped and sparsely developed areas are mobilised from contaminated land by floodwaters. development safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and where possible, reducing
generally not suitable for most development. flood risk. The relevant policies for the Govan area contained within the Glasgow City
Water Framework The main impact of the WFD on flood risk management, both now
SPP is a statement of Scottish Government policy on land use Directive (2000) 10 and in the future, relates to the ecological quality of water bodies. Plan12 Part 3: Development and Design Guidance, adopted 2009.
planning and provides a national framework on which local planning Channel works, such as straightening and deepening, or flood risk
policy is based. management schemes that modify geomorphological processes
can change river morphology. The WFD aims to protect Table 5.2: Local policy legislation and policy context (Glasgow City Council)
The Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act (FRMA) was passed by conservation sites identified by the EC Habitats Directive and Birds
Parliament in July 2009 and received Royal Assent in July 2009. Directive that have water-related features, by designating them as Legislation Key provisions
Specific measures within the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) ‘protected sites’.
Act 2009 include: AIM
 A framework for coordination and cooperation between all Sewers for Scotland, 3rd Edition is a design and construction guide To ensure satisfactory sustainable measures are provided for the
organisations involved in flood risk management aimed at all developers and consultants who plan to undertake management and safe disposal of surface water run-off.
Flood Risk development of any size in Scotland. POLICY
 Assessment of flood risk and preparation of flood risk
Management Sewers for
management plans The guidance includes guidance on SUDS which is now All development proposals are required to make satisfactory provision for
(Scotland) Act Scotland, 3rd
(2009) 7  New responsibilities for SEPA, Scottish Water and local incorporated under the term ‘sewer’ due to the WFD legislation. Policy ENV4: Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS - see Definition). The only exception
Edition (2015)11
authorities in relation to flood risk management The guidance provides construction standards and vesting Sustainable to this requirement is a proposal for a single dwelling.
Drainage SUDS will be required in association with any open space requirements for
 A revised, streamlined process for flood protection schemes conditions for the adoption of Scottish Water for drainage
Systems a development (see policy ENV 2: Open Space and Public Realm
 New methods to enable stakeholders and the public to infrastructure. (SuDS) Provision). The Council expects that the SUDS infrastructure will most likely
contribute to managing flood risk, and;
be integrated into a development’s open space requirement.
 A single enforcement authority for the safe operation of
SUDS proposals should:
Scotland's reservoirs.
 incorporate, or connect to, an acceptable overland flood-routing
8 or design exceedance solution (see Definition) agreed by the
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2011), National Flood Risk Assessment
9
Council;
Water Resources (Scotland) Act, 2011
10
European Union (2000) Water Framework Directive, Directive 2000/60/EC
7 11 12
Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act, 2009 Scottish Water (2015), ‘Sewers for Scotland’ 3rd Edition Glasgow City Council (2009),Glasgow City Plan
p 98 p 99
B12
 be designed to accommodate a 1 in 30 year rainstorm event with www.sepa.org.uk. The FRA and/or DIA must clearly assess the nature of 12: Green Belt. Development on, or affecting, the functional flood plains (including a detailed scheme, based on ‘Whole Life Costs’
the ability to deal with a 1 in 200 year event by safe flood routing; the particular flood risk and drainage issues that the proposal needs to within the City boundary should not: to enable an appropriate bond to be calculated to cover
 use agreed methods of surface water run-off collection, treatment, address, the likely effects of the proposal on flood risk and drainage impact  contribute to the piecemeal reduction of flood plain storage scheme maintenance).
decontamination and disposal; and whether mitigation would be likely to be acceptable and effective. They capacity; or WATER RESISTANT BUILDING MATERIALS
should also clarify the separation between planning considerations and
 not be detrimental to the effectiveness of existing SUDS  interfere, detrimentally, with the flow of water in the flood plain. Where approval in principle, in relation to flood risk, is acceptable, all new
requirements and those of other Environmental Regulatory Regimes with
schemes; Exceptionally, where a case for infrastructure, such as a bridge, etc., has build developments, including extensions to buildings, should use water
regard to the water environment.
 incorporate a design appropriate to the site, particularly where been justified, it should be designed in accordance with this policy, remain resistant materials and forms of construction where:
The Council, in applying the Scottish Government’s flood risk framework,
contamination is present (expert advice should be sought at an operational in times of flooding and minimise its effect on flood water  proposals are in ‘medium to high’ flood risk areas;
considers that:
early stage); and storage capacity.  flooding from any source is an issue; and
(a) Areas of little or no flood risk (annual probability of flooding of less than
 incorporate natural and semi-natural elements to enhance CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SEWERAGE SYSTEM  development is located in proximity to a Sustainable Drainage
0.1% or 1:1000) present no flood related constraints on development.
environmental amenity and biodiversity. All development proposals requiring foul drainage must be connected to System (SUDS) (see Definition).
(b) Areas of low to medium flood risk (annual probability 0.1% – 0.5% or
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS the public sewerage system. The only exception to this requirement applies Developers should consult the detailed guidance in Planning Advice Note
1:1000 – 1:200) are suitable for most forms of development. They are not
The Council will require development proposals to comply with the SUDS in areas where connection to the collection system is not permitted due to a (PAN) 69: Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding.
appropriate locations, however, for essential civil infrastructure. If the
requirements set out in any surface water management plans prepared for lack of capacity and Scottish Water have agreed to address this in its SR 06
Council is satisfied that there is no viable alternative location, or that such Flood Risk
parts of the City (e.g. Clyde Gateway and Toryglen). (2006/2010) and SR 10 (2010/2014) investment programmes. In such
facilities already exist and are proposed to be extended, the facilities Assessment
cases, the use of temporary private treatment systems will be permitted This Guidance is intended as supplementary guidance for the area of
Surface water management plans may require to be prepared for larger (including access roads/paths, parking and waste storage areas) must be and Drainage
until connection to a sewer is possible. The following requirements, Glasgow in respect of existing national legislation and guidance regarding
developments where development is divided into multiple ownership (e.g. a capable of remaining operational and accessible during extreme flooding Impact
however, will apply: flooding and drainage. It also aims to encourage an increased awareness,
large housing development) where no management plan has been events. Assessment:
 The sewerage network must be designed and built to a standard understanding and knowledge in flooding and drainage issues of everyone
prepared. The developer would be responsible for its preparation, in liaison (c) Areas of medium to high flood risk (annual probability greater than 0.5%
which will allow adoption by Scottish Water. Planning involved in the development process and thus make Glasgow a safer place
with the Council and Scottish Water. or >1:200) are not suitable for essential civil infrastructure, however: Guidance for to live, work and visit.
 The sewerage network must be designed such that they can be
AIM (i) development within Glasgow’s built-up area for residential, institutional, developers
easily connected to a public sewer in the future.
To safeguard development from the risk of flooding and to ensure new commercial and industrial development (including access roads/paths, 2011
13
parking and waste storage areas) may be acceptable provided: Typically, this will mean providing a drainage line up to a likely point of
development does not have an adverse impact on the water environment,
connection. The developer must provide Scottish Water with the funds to
does not materially increase the probability of flooding elsewhere and does an FRA is undertaken (supplemented, where necessary, by a DIA) to
allow it to complete the connection once the sewerage system has been
not interfere detrimentally with the storage capacity of any functional flood address overland flow or other drainage considerations, and flood
upgraded. However, such temporary arrangements will not be permitted on
plain (see Definition) or associated water flows. prevention measures for an event with a 0.5% annual probability already
flood plains or in areas liable to flood (i.e. at an annual risk of not less than
POLICY exist, are under construction or committed;
0.5%).
FLOOD MANAGEMENT  development along the length of the River Clyde takes
CULVERTED WATERCOURSES
cognisance of any additional supplementary development
2. Proposals should demonstrate that they: guidance produced for the River Corridor; and Development over an existing culvert, which includes removal of the culvert,
 contribute to minimising flood risk; or its diversion into parts of the site not covered by structures, should:
 proposals within the River Clyde corridor, which include land
 avoid any increased risk of flooding which would affect people being permanently raised above the surrounding ground level, benefit wildlife and improve amenity, wherever possible (see policy ENV 6:
and properties from any source (e.g. sewer, watercourse (see comply with the guidance on Landraising in SPP 7: Planning and Biodiversity); and
Definition) or surface water) either within the development site, or Flooding; and the requirements of the Water Environment and provide adequate access for maintenance. Proposals for the formation of
Policy ENV5: outwith the site as a consequence of the development giving due Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003. new culverts will normally not be supported.
Flood attention to access and egress routes; and (ii) development within Glasgow’s Green Belt should be located outwith the FLOOD DEFENCES AND PREVENTION SCHEMES
Prevention  address the cumulative impact on infrastructure capacity of 0.5% (200 year) annual probability flood plain contour, (see Section 3
and Land In order to reduce the risk of flooding, there is a need to ensure that the
incremental growth of impermeable surfaces by not increasing the below)
Drainage long term maintenance of all flood defences and flood prevention schemes
quantity and rate of surface water run-off from any site. All development within areas of medium to high flood risk must incorporate is addressed. To this end:
THE FLOOD RISK FRAMEWORK a ‘freeboard allowance’ height margin (see Definition) and/or the use of  new flood prevention schemes or measures should be
Notwithstanding the flood risk areas identified on the Scottish Environment water resistant materials (see Definition) and forms of construction compatible, on the grounds of design and safety, with those being
Protection Agency’s (SEPA) Indicative River and Coastal Flood Map appropriate to its function, location, and planned lifetime relative to the implemented on the River Clyde and the White Cart Water;
(Scotland) (see Note), the Council expects developers to consider the: anticipated changes in risk arising from climate change.
 new schemes should be designed to allow access for
 flood risk to their proposed development from any source, FUNCTIONAL FLOOD PLAINS management, monitoring and maintenance;
including watercourses, through a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA); To comply with SPP 7 and to implement the emerging principles of  proposals should not prejudice other existing or proposed flood
and sustainable flood management, development in a functional floodplain will prevention schemes/works; and
 impact of discharging surface water from the proposed be considered to be contrary to the objectives of the Plan. In exceptional
 proposals, involving multiple riparian ownerships (see Definition),
development to any watercourse, through a Drainage Impact circumstances, where land is required to facilitate key development
should include a Section 75 Agreement, which:
Assessment (DIA). strategies which come forward through the development plan process, land
raising may be acceptable provided compensatory flood storage is provided  alters the title to the land to give the Council rights of
DG/ENV 6: River Clyde Flood Management Strategy Development Guide
and the objectives of the EU Water Framework Directive are not access for maintenance and flood risk reduction
will be used when assessing development proposals/applications.
compromised (see policy IB 10: Minerals, Land Fill and Land Raise). purposes; and
Flood Risk and Drainage Impact Assessments  meets the Council’s requirement for a legally and
Remaining undeveloped areas of flood plain within Glasgow are covered by 13
Glasgow City Council (2011), Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Impact Assessment (Planning Guidance
These must conform to the requirements set out in guidance at the development policy principle designation DEV 11: Green Space or DEV financially sound maintenance regime to be in place for Developers)
p 100 p 101
B12
6.3 Relevant studies 6.4.1.2 Private sewers
6 SOURCES OF INFORMATION Table 6.1: Relevant studies  No plans have been provided of existing private sewers within the site boundary. 7 SOURCES OF FLOOD RISK
Study Comments
6.1 Introduction 6.5 Glasgow City Council response 7.1 Criteria
This Local Plan District summary sheet provides information on the In accordance with the SPP and advice from the SEPA and Glasgow City Council, a
Reliance has been placed on factual and anecdotal data obtained from the sources main sources of flooding and associated impacts identified through the A response from Glasgow City Council following a data request was received. The
National Flood Risk Assessment. It also provides a summary of prediction of the flood sources and levels is required along with the effects of climate
identified. RSK cannot be held responsible for any omissions, misrepresentations, response is summarised below, with the full response included in Appendix E.
Potentially Vulnerable Areas within the Local Plan District and how they change from the present for the design life of the development (in this case assumed to
errors or inaccuracies with the supplied information. New information, revised practices FRMP
are spread between local authorities. More detailed information on the  The site lies within an area currently identified as partially at risk from coastal be a 200 year event).
or changes in legislation may necessitate the re-interpretation of the report in whole or Clyde and Loch sources and impacts of floods, including past events and catchment flooding during a 1:200 year flood event;
in part. Lomond Local characteristics, will be developed as part of the Flood Risk Management SPP states no specific requirements for an allowance for climate change. However,
Plan District14 Strategies for each Local Plan District.  Flood mapping shows sections of the site to be located in areas at risk of fluvial since the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 specifically requires SEPA, in
The information in this report has been prepared following consultation with third party
It is noted that the site lies with the Glasgow City North Potentially flooding during a 1:200 year plus climate change event; development of its hazard maps and FRM plans, to consider climate change, it is
consultees, and receipt of third party information. In some instances this may only be
Vulnerable Area; however the actual site location is not thought to be at therefore probable that local authorities will adopt the same requirements. It is not
verbal or informal responses.  The River Clyde is the only watercourse within the vicinity of the site. According to
risk of flooding. national policy to add an additional allowance for climate change above the 0.5%
Such information and opinions received from third parties are likely to be subjective to the LES River Clyde Flood Management Strategy Flood Map, the 1 in 200 year
(1:200) probability but planning authorities may do so if it can be justified, taking
the individuals concerned, and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the bodies (+cc) flood envelope for the River Clyde encroaches on the northern section of the
account of the most recent UKCIP scenarios as applied to the area concerned. An
themselves. As such, said opinions may be subject to variation, clarification or site; allowance for ‘freeboard’ would be additional and may be required as a response to
6.4 Drainage
expansion upon submission of more detailed proposals from the developer.  Historically a watercourse entered the site in the south east corner before local circumstances.
All opinions expressed are based upon current design standards and policies in force at 6.4.1 Public and Private sewers meandering and exiting towards to the north east. We hold no information of when The flood risk elements that need to be considered for any site are defined in BS 8533
the date of this report. These standards may be subject to change with the passage of Scottish Water asset plans and private drainage records have been referenced to this watercourse ceased to exist or if it is now a sewer; as the “Forms of Flooding” and are listed as:
time. provide information on local sewers. The Scottish Water plans can be found in  The 1 in 200 year indicative pluvial flood map indicates some small pockets of the  Flooding from Rivers (fluvial flood risk);
The opinions expressed herein are intended to provide general guidance as to how a Appendix D. The records indicate the following network of sewers around the site: site with a medium to low risk of surface water flooding;
 Flooding from the Sea (tidal flood risk);
problem related to a particular development might be resolved. Given the paucity of the
6.4.1.1 Public sewers (Appendix D)  The Supplementary Development Guide policy above requires that building finished
original information, and the often-indirect nature of information received, they should  Flooding from the Land;
floor levels should be set at 6.0mAOD or above for this particular site which
not be relied upon as absolute or definitive guidance as to any particular solution. Such  There are 2no. existing combined sewers which run south along Water Row before includes allowances for freeboard, climate change and wave action;  Flooding from Groundwater;
conclusions can only sensibly be arrived at upon detailed design. connecting into the wider combined network on Govan Road.
 Policy under the City Plan 2 and Roads Development Guide require that roads and  Flooding from Sewers (sewer and drain exceedance, pumping station failure etc);
As a consequence of the above, RSK LDE will not be held liable for any consequential  An existing combined sewer runs from the current show person grounds out into footways be set at the 1 in 200 year level including climate change. Roads and and
losses, howsoever caused, as a consequence of inaccurate missing, incomplete, or Water Row before connecting into the combined sewer noted above. Footways proposed for the above site would therefore require to be set at a  Flooding from Reservoirs, Canals and other Artificial Structures.
erroneous data contained in this report, nor any data capable of being subject to
 An existing combined sewer runs south along Pearce Street before connecting into minimum of 5.28m AOD; and
variable interpretation by means of its generalised nature. The following section reviews each of these in respect of the subject site.
the wider combined network on Govan Road.  Glasgow City Council would strongly advise against constructing on the functional
 A surface water overflow runs from the combined system runs from the central flood plain of the River Clyde.
6.2 SEPA flood zone maps areas of Water Row to the north before discharging to the River Clyde. 7.2 Flooding from rivers / coastal
SEPA Flood Zone mapping study for Scotland is available on their website at  Foul and surface water sewers serve the Napier development to the east of the site 7.2.1 River Clyde
.
http://map.sepa.org.uk/floodmap/map.htm
o The foul network from the Napier development connects into the combined The latest SEPA published flood zone mapping shows the site to lie within the fluvial /
sewer network in Water Row and in doing so, a foul sewer runs east – west coastal flood zone. The principal areas shown to be at risk are the show person
through the site boundary; compound, the northern extent of Water Row and the area along the banks of the
o The surface water network from the Napier development connects into the
Clyde.
surface water overflow in Water Row, prior to the discharge location into the The River Clyde is shown to impact upon the northern area of the site during the 200
River Clyde. year event and the 200 year plus climate change event as noted on the mapping
provided by Glasgow City Council. The mapping for the 200 year plus climate change
 Further combined sewers are located in the wider area.
event shows the flood extent is predominantly restricted to the northern section of
Water Row and the area of the show person compound.
14
Glasgow City Council (2016), Clyde and Loch Lomond Local Flood Risk Management Plan
p 102 p 103
B12
Glasgow City Council also provided the River Clyde Flood Management Strategy in this area. The levels provided by the topograhical suirvey are considered to be more 7.4 Flooding from groundwater When exceeded, the surcharged pipe work will lead to flooding from backed up
Hydrodynamic Modelling Report for the Flood Defence Levels15. accurate that LiDAR data which is likley to have been used to generate the flood manholes and gully connections. This will lead to immediate flooding within highways
outlines from the River Clyde Flood Management Strategy, Groundwater flooding occurs when the water held underground rises to a level where it surrounding the site. Surface water would most likely be channelled into the road gullies
The model results have been reviewed and levels assessed at Node Points SEC_29, breaks the surface in areas away from usual channels and drainage pathways. in the area. Therefore, the risk of sewer flooding is considered to be low for the site
SEC_30 and SEC_31 which are located adjacent to the site. The levels provided at Following the advice provided by Glasgow City Council, the residual risk of flooding Groundwater flooding typically occurs following long periods of sustained intense area.
these Node Points are presented in Table 7.1 below. from fluvial / coastal sources to the majority of the site is therefore considered as little rainfall and is typically associated with low-lying areas underlain by permeable aquifers.
or no risk. Any areas below the flood level i.e. the cycle way along the Clyde and the As noted in Section 6.4, there are sewers located in the vicinity of the site. In the event
Table 7.1: SEPA Flood Level Data slip way on Water Row would be classed as a higher risk. In accordance with SEPA flood mapping, the site could be at a low likelihood of of sewer surcharge, it is likely that the water would be contained within the road network
groundwater as per the significant areas of the southern banks of the River Clyde (i.e. Water Row) and follow the fall in the road and flow though the site discharging to
7.2.2 Historic Watercourse shown as being at risk of groundwater flooding
Predicted Water Level Minimum Design Level the River Clyde, therefore there is not likely to be a direct impact on the developable
(mAOD) Information provided by Glasgow City Council notes the location of a historic areas.
Groundwater levels were recorded in several of the borehole records undertaken as
watercourse flowing through the eastern section of the site. The former route is part of the Riverside Feasibility Study. The groundwater levels in the boreholes range
Label T10 T25 T50 T100 T200 T200+c T500 mAOD Development has the potential to cause an increase in impermeable area, an
max max max max max c max max unknown and there is no confirmation of when the watercourse ceased to be in from ca. 2.5mbgl to 8mbgl, with stated ground levels in the logs predominantly recorded associated increase in surface water runoff rates and volumes, and a consequent
existence or whether this was diverted into the sewer network. There is no clear record in the region of 5.4mAOD to 5.6mAOD. potential increase in downstream flood risk due to overloading of sewers, watercourses,
SEC_29 4.40 4.63 4.77 4.89 4.98 5.28 5.11 5.98 of a watercourse in the region on OS mapping from 1856 or 1904.
(200yr+ From the above and due to the sporadic nature of groundwater flooding, the design of culverts and other drainage infrastructure.
CC+0.7 7.2.3 Climate change the development (i.e. no basements) and underlying superficial geology noted in the
m) To ensure that sewer and surface water flooding is not exacerbated; surface water must
Table 7.1 includes an allowance for climate change on the T200 event, and Section 3.4 where groundwater was recorded in the region of 2.5 – 8mbgl, there is be considered within the design of the site. This ensures that any additional surface
SEC_30 4.40 4.63 4.77 4.89 4.98 5.28 5.11 5.98 development levels have been recommended to be set a minimum of 700mm above potential that groundwater flooding could impact upon the construction works. In line water and overland flows are managed correctly, to minimise flood risk to the site and
(200yr+ this level to accommodate for this. Therefore climate change influences on fluvial and with the guidance from GCC to raise the finished floor levels of the development to the surrounding area.
CC+0.7 6mAOD, this should limit any potential groundwater flood risk to the development,
m) coastal flooding does not intrinsically alter the residual flood risk to the development. As
though there could be a limited potential for groundwater interaction should there be The resultant sewer flood risk is considered little or no risk.
noted above, areas below the flood level i.e. the cycle way along the Clyde and the slip
SEC_31 4.39 4.62 4.76 4.88 4.97 5.27 5.10 5.97 way on Water Row would be more susceptible to climate change influences. any deep excavations on site. The residual groundwater flood risk to the development is 7.5.1 Climate change
(200yr+ considered little or no risk.
CC+0.7 The impact of climate change is likely to be negative regarding flooding from sewers.
m) 7.4.1 Climate change Increased rainfall and more frequent flooding put existing sewer and drainage systems
7.3 Flooding from the land (overland pluvial flood risk) under additional pressure resulting in the potential for more frequent surcharging and
Climate change could increase the risk of groundwater flooding as a result of increased
If intense rain is unable to soak into the ground or be carried through manmade precipitation filtering into the groundwater body. If winter rainfall becomes more frequent potential flooding. This would increase the frequency of local sewer flooding but not
As noted in Section 3.2, the majority of the surveyed site levels are in the region of significant in terms of the proposed development.
drainage systems, for a variety of reasons, it can run off over the surface causing and heavier, groundwater levels may increase. Higher winter recharge may however be
5.6mAOD to 6.5mAOD as as such would be shown to lie above the T200 + Climate
localised floods before reaching a river or other watercourse. balanced by lower recharge during the predicted hotter and drier summers. This is less
Change levels and T500 levels. The ground levels along the banks of the Clyde are
shown to range from 3.2mAOD to 4.5mAOD and as such would be subject to flooding Generally, where there is impermeable surfacing or where the ground infiltration likely to cause a significant change to flood risk than from other sources, since
groundwater flow is not as confined. It is probable that any locally perched aquifers may 7.6 Flooding from Canals
during a 25 year event, with levels at the northernmost end of Water Row in the region capacity is exceeded, surface water runoff will occur. Excess surface water flows from
of 5mAOD to 5.3mAOD. the site are believed to drain naturally to the local water features (highway drainage), be more affected, but these are likely to be isolated. With the designed finished floor There are no canals located within close proximity to the site, therefore there is little or
either by overland flow or via the existing drainage features. levels for the site, the change in flood risk is likely to be little or no risk. no risk from this source.
Following the consultation response from Glasgow City Council, it is noted that building
finished floor levels should be set at 6.0 mAOD or above (which includes allowances for The SEPA surface water flood mapping shows that the site is at little or no risk of
freeboard, climate change and wave action). Setting development finished floor levels flooding from pluvial sources and the site is slightly raised up above the immediately 7.5 Flooding from sewers
at 6.0mAOD or above also provides a minimum of 890mm of freeboard above the T500 adjacent surrounding levels in the carriageways indicating that any mapped surface 7.7 Historic flooding
event (Table 7.1 above) if flatted developments are to be considered at the site. water flooding in the highways would be retained within the carriageway. The available Flooding from artificial drainage systems occurs when flow entering a system, such as Data provided in the Clyde and Loch Lomond Local District Flood Risk Management
topographic survey also shows the general fall of the site to be in a northerly direction an urban storm water drainage system, exceeds its conveyance capacity, the system Strategy notes the wider White Cart Water area (PVA11/13) has a long history of
The levels above accord with the SEPA flood map and the flood outlines provided by
towards the River Clyde It is believed that the surface water drainage network within the becomes blocked or it cannot discharge due to a high water level in the receiving flooding with over 20 significant floods in the last 100 years. The site is shown to lie
Glasgow City Council highlighting the areas along the banks of the River Clyde and the
surrounding roads will reduce any instances of run-on. watercourse. A sewer flood is often caused by surface water drains discharging into within a 1km grid square where there are between 1 and 50 properties at potential risk
northern extent of Water Row to be located within the flood zone.
the combined sewer systems; sewer capacity is exceeded in large rainfall events of flooding.
As a result of the above information and the underlying sandy geology of the site, the
It should be noted that the fluvial flood mapping provided by GCC shows the area of the causing the backing up of floodwaters within properties or discharging through
risk of surface water flooding to the site remains to be considered as little or no risk. Whilst there are flooding issues in the wider White Cart Water area, there are currently
show person compound to be located within the extent of the 1 in 200 year plus climate manholes. Most adopted surface water drainage networks are designed to the criteria
change event (max level from table 7.1 is 5.28mAOD), though the topogaphic levels on 7.3.1 Climate change set out in Sewers for Scotland. One of the design parameters is that sewer systems be no objectives to manage flooding in the vicinity of the site as part of the Clyde and Loch
site in this area are shown to range from 5.43mAOD to 5.70mAOD, placing it outside of designed such that no flooding of any part of the site occurs in a 1 in 30 year rainfall Lomond Local District Flood Risk Management Strategy.
Surface water flooding is likely to increase as a result of climate change in a similar
the 200 year plus climate change event, thus the flood risk can be considered to be low event. By definition a 1 in 100 year event would exceed the capacity of the surrounding
ratio to fluvial flooding. Increased intensity and frequency of precipitation is likely to lead
sewer network as well as any proposed drainage. The adopted sewers are regularly
to reduced infiltration and increased overland flow.
15 inspected and maintained by Scottish Water so there is little risk.
Halcrow / Fairhurst, River Clyde Flood Management Strategy, Hydrodynamic Modelling Report (Flood Defence
Levels for Design)
p 104 p 105
B12
7.8 Flood risk resulting from the development Where development of residential units and access and egress roads are proposed,
In theory any development can increase flood risk downstream, if appropriate mitigation 8 PLANNING CONTEXT these should where possible be sited outside of the 1 in 200 year flood extent, though
where this is not possible will be subject to the criteria put forward by GCC in terms of
is not included. This potential is much increased where the site is on greenfield land, as
finished floor levels and road levels. Therefore the location outlined for the development
development tends to increase impermeable surfaces, resulting in increased runoff from
8.1 Application of planning policy should be considered as predominantly Little or No Risk, with small areas of low risk
the site.
(associated with the 200 year plus climate change event) for flooding and there are no
The Flooding and Drainage section of the SPP includes information and policies
Due to the nature of the development, there will be an increase in impermeable area constraints due to watercourse, coastal or tidal flooding.
specifically dealing with development planning and flood risk using a risk framework.
from the pre-development state and as such, the development should focus on the
The risk framework provides a basis for planning decisions in relation to flood risk and
management of surface water run-off to ensure flood risk is not increased downstream.
takes into account:
The site is current a mix of car parking, scrubland and the areas associated with the
 The characteristics of the site;
traveller camp.
 the use and design of the proposed development;
 the size of the area likely to flood;
7.9 Flood risk summary
 depth of water, likely flow rate and path, rate of rise and duration;
The proposed site area is located outside the flood zones as shown on the SEPA flood
mapping service. Mapping provided by Glasgow City Council notes that sections of the  existing flood prevention measures – extent, standard and maintenance regime;
site are shown to lie within the 200 year fluvial plus climate change flood extent, though  the allowance for freeboard;
topographic levels in this area place the show person compound above the 200 year
 cumulative effects of development, especially the loss of flood storage capacity;
plus climate change modelled flood level as provided in the River Clyde Flood
Management Strategy. This, and in accordance with the physical and natural features  cross boundary effects and the need for consultation with adjacent authorities;
in the surrounding vicinity indicates that the majority of the site is at little or no risk of
 effects of a flood on access including by emergency services; and
fluvial, coastal and pluvial flooding, with areas in close proximity to the Clyde (i.e. show
person compound from GCC mapping and the northern extent of Water Row and  the extent to which the development, its materials and construction are designed to
Promenade area) shown to be at a low to medium risk. be water resistant.
Flood risk from other sources (sewer, groundwater, artificial bodies) to the proposed
development site is considered to be little or no risk.
8.2 Risk Framework
SPP includes a risk framework which provides specific information regarding the list of
appropriate developments dependent on vulnerability to flooding. In applying the risk
framework, reference is made to Figure 8.1 overleaf, reproduced from SPP.
Figure 8.1: SPP Risk Framework
With reference to the SEPA flood hazard maps, the majority of the proposed site
boundary appears to be at ‘Little or No Risk’ of flooding. Areas directly to the adjacent
to the Clyde could be considered to range from Low to Medium Risk to Medium to High
Risk. However, the flood maps cannot be used for site specific analysis therefore, a
detailed review of flood strategies has been undertaken to validate the SEPA mapping
outputs.
p 106 p 107
B12
Services. For the avoidance of doubt, unless otherwise expressly referred to in the introduction to
9 FLOOD MITIGATION MEASURES 10 CONCLUSIONS AND APPENDIX A this report, RSK did not seek to evaluate the presence on or off the site of asbestos,
electromagnetic fields, lead paint, heavy metals, radon gas or other radioactive or hazardous
RECOMMENDATIONS SERVICE CONSTRAINTS materials.
9.1 Context 7. The Services are based upon RSK's observations of existing physical conditions at the site
Based on the data provided by the flood zone map and the topographic survey for the This FRA complies with the NPF3 and SPP and demonstrates that flood risk from all RSK Group service constraints gained from a walk-over survey of the site together with RSK's interpretation of information
site, it can be concluded that the sections of the site are is at risk from fluvial flooding sources has been considered in the proposed development. It is also consistent with including documentation, obtained from third parties and from the client on the history and usage
during a 200 year plus 20% climate change event. the Local Planning Authority requirements with regard to flood risk. 1. This report and the Drainage design carried out in connection with the report (together the of the site. The Services are also based on information and/or analysis provided by independent
"Services") were compiled and carried out by RSK LDE Ltd (RSK) for Govan Housing testing and information services or laboratories upon which RSK was reasonably entitled to rely.
The proposed development site lies in an area that is not shown to be at flood risk from
Association Limited (the "client") in accordance with the terms of a contract between RSK and The Services clearly are limited by the accuracy of the information, including documentation,
the SEPA flood hazard maps.
9.2 Development Finished Floor Levels and Flood resilient the "client". The Services were performed by RSK with the skill and care ordinarily exercised by a reviewed by RSK and the observations possible at the time of the walk-over survey. Further RSK
SPP sets out a Risk Framework, which provides specific information regarding reasonable Civil Engineer at the time the Services were performed. Further, and in particular, the
construction was not authorised and did not attempt to independently verify the accuracy or completeness of
suitability of development within areas at different levels of risk. This flood risk Services were performed by RSK taking into account the limits of the scope of works required by information, documentation or materials received from the client or third parties, including
assessment demonstrates that the site lies within an area at low or very low risk and the client, the time scale involved and the resources, including financial and manpower
One of the most robust methods of removing a development from the floodplain is to laboratories and information services, during the performance of the Services. RSK is not liable
therefore there are no constraints due to watercourse, coastal or tidal flooding. resources, agreed between RSK and the client.
raise the ground floor level above the predicted design flood levels. Where possible the for any inaccurate information or conclusions, the discovery of which inaccuracies required the
threshold levels of the existing development should be raised as high as practicable. The proposed development will alter the impermeable area therefore increasing the 2. Other than that expressly contained in paragraph 1 above, RSK provides no other doing of any act including the gathering of any information which was not reasonably available to
surface water runoff from the site. However, measures will be recommended to reduce RSK and including the doing of any independent investigation of the information provided to RSK
In line with the responses from Glasgow City Council; representation or warranty whether express or implied, in relation to the Services.
surface water runoff through the use of suitable SuDS measures. save as otherwise provided in the terms of the contract between the client and RSK.
 The building finished floor levels should be set at 6.0mAOD or above for this 3. Unless otherwise agreed the Services were performed by RSK exclusively for the purposes of
This flood risk assessment has concluded that: 8. The phase II or intrusive environmental site investigation aspects of the Services is a limited
particular site which includes allowances for freeboard, climate change and the client. RSK is not aware of any interest of or reliance by any party other than the client in or
wave action; and  The site is located within an area which is shown to be at risk of fluvial / coastal on the Services. Unless expressly provided in writing, RSK does not authorise, consent or sampling of the site at pre-determined borehole and soil vapour locations based on the
flooding in accordance with mapping provided by Glasgow City Council which condone any party other than the client relying upon the Services. Should this report or any part operational configuration of the site. The conclusions given in this report are based on
 Policy under the City Plan 2 and Roads Development Guide require that roads appears to show a greater flood extent than outlined on the SEPA flood maps; information gathered at the specific test locations and can only be extrapolated to an undefined
of this report, or otherwise details of the Services or any part of the Services be made known to
and footways be set at the 1 in 200 year level including climate change. Roads limited area around those locations. The extent of the limited area depends on the soil and
 Flood levels for the Clyde have reviewed from the River Clyde Flood Management any such party, and such party relies thereon that party does so wholly at its own and sole risk
and Footways proposed for the above site would therefore require to be set at a groundwater conditions, together with the position of any current structures and underground
Strategy Hydrodynamic Modelling Report for the Flood Defence Levels. Maximum and RSK disclaims any liability to such parties. Any such party would be well advised to seek
minimum of 5.28m AOD. facilities and natural and other activities on site. In addition chemical analysis was carried out for
flood levels provided in the document are 5.28mAOD under the 200 year plus independent advice from a competent environmental consultant and/or lawyer.
climate change event. a limited number of parameters [as stipulated in the contract between the client and RSK] [based
4. It is RSK’s understanding that this report is to be used for the purpose described in the on an understanding of the available operational and historical information,] and it should not be
9.3 Evacuation and egress  Flood risk from surface water is considered low at the site, with the site consisting of introduction to the report. That purpose was a significant factor in determining the scope and inferred that other chemical species are not present.
a drained car park and scrubland with levels falling towards the River Clyde; level of the Services. Should the purpose for which the report is used, or the proposed use of the
9.3.1 On site safety 9. Any site drawing(s) provided in this report is (are) not meant to be an accurate base plan, but
 Flood risk from other sources – groundwater, sewers, – is demonstrated to be low; site change, this report may no longer be valid and any further use of or reliance upon the report
Safety during severe flooding events needs to be considered. The main factors will be in those circumstances by the client without RSK's review and advice shall be at the client's sole is (are) used to present the general relative locations of features on, and surrounding, the site.
 As noted in the response from Glasgow City Council, building finished floor levels and own risk. Should RSK be requested to review the report after the date hereof, RSK shall be
the depth of water and the speed of flow.
should be set at 6.0 mAOD or above (which includes allowances for freeboard,
entitled to additional payment at the then existing rates or such other terms as agreed between
In addition, a main safety aspect of flooding is that of the availability of a safe means of climate change and wave action). Setting development finished floor levels at
RSK and the client.
access to and from the site during a flood event. 6.0mAOD or above also provides a minimum of 890mm of freeboard above the
T500 event if flatted developments are to be considered at the site, 5. The passage of time may result in changes in site conditions, regulatory or other legal
The main means by which flood risks will be managed is through the SEPA's Floodline.
 Road and footpath levels at the site should be set at the 1 in 200 year level provisions, technology or economic conditions which could render the report inaccurate or
This makes arrangements for warnings to be provided to flood wardens within the area
including climate change (5.28mAOD) ;and unreliable. The information and conclusions contained in this report should not be relied upon in
by telephone, including individual warnings to high-risk properties.
the future without the written advice of RSK. In the absence of such written advice of RSK,
Flood alerts have no effect on flood levels or flows, but provide communities with an  Safe and dry access to and from should be available at all times to areas located
reliance on the report in the future shall be at the client's own and sole risk. Should RSK be
outwith all mapped flood risk areas (i.e. southern sections of Water Row and Govan
opportunity to respond in advance of a flood. They also provide the opportunity for requested to review the report in the future, RSK shall be entitled to additional payment at the
Road).
devising an appropriate ‘incident’ management strategy. Management procedures are then existing rate or such other terms as may be agreed between RSK and the client.
to be developed to assess the risk of flooding following advice either from SEPA. Overall, taking into account the above points, the development of the site should not be
precluded on flood risk grounds. 6. The observations and conclusions described in this report are based solely upon the Services,
9.3.2 Off-site safety which were provided pursuant to the agreement between the client and RSK. RSK has not
performed any observations, investigations, studies or testing not specifically set out or required
In the event of any flooding event at the site, safe egress from the areas affected by
by the contract between the client and RSK. RSK is not liable for the existence of any condition,
flooding can be gained via to the south along Water Row to the areas of Govan Road.
the discovery of which would require performance of services not otherwise contained in the
These areas are shown to lie outwith the fluvial and coastal flood extents.
Govan Housing Association Limited 30 Govan Housing Association Limited 31 Govan Housing Association Limited Govan Housing Association Limited
p 108 p 109
B12
APPENDIX B
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY

Water Row, Govan
Flood Risk Assessment
881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 110 p 111
B12
p 112 p 113
B12
p 114 p 115
B12
APPENDIX C
MASTERPLAN SITE BOUNDARY

Water Row, Govan
881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 116 p 117
B12
APPENDIX D
SCOTTISH WATER SEWER RECORDS

Water Row, Govan
881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 118 p 119
B12
APPENDIX E
GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL
CORRESPONDENCE
The location of the historic watercourse
shown on this plan is reproduced from
historic OS mapping. No guarantee is given
to the completeness of accuracy of this
information.
Historic Watercourse
© Crown Copyright and database right 2015. All rights reserved. OS Licence No. 100023379
You are not permitted to copy, sub-license or sell any of this data to third parties in any form. 05/12/2017
Development and Regeneration Services Historic Watercourse
Date: 05/12/2017 Scale: 1:2,500
231 George Street, Glasgow G1 1RX Prepared By: C.Ferry

Water Row, Govan
881325-R1(03)-FRA
p 120 p 121
B12
Pluvial 1 in 200 year

Value
High : 43.5654
Low : 0.1
Fluvial 1 in 200 +cc
© Crown Copyright and database right 2015. All rights reserved. OS Licence No. 100023379 © Crown Copyright and database right 2015. All rights reserved. OS Licence No. 100023379
You are not permitted to copy, sub-license or sell any of this data to third parties in any form. 05/12/2017 You are not permitted to copy, sub-license or sell any of this data to third parties in any form. 05/12/2017
Development and Regeneration Services Date: 05/12/2017 Scale: 1:2,500 Development and Regeneration Services Date: 05/12/2017 Scale: 1:2,500
1 in 200 year Pluvial Flood Map 1 in 200 year (plus Climate Change) Fluvial Flood Map
231 George Street, Glasgow G1 1RX Prepared By: C.Ferry 231 George Street, Glasgow G1 1RX Prepared By: C.Ferry
p 122 p 123
B12
Kristian Jackson
From: Lowe, John (LES) [John.Lowe@glasgow.gov.uk]
Sent: 08 December 2017 12:25
To: Kathryn Olive
Cc: Esposito, Raffaele (DRS); Hay, David (DRS); Harrison, Andrew (LES)
Subject: RE: Flood Information Request - Water Row, Govan (881325) (OFFICIAL)
Attachments: RCFMS_R2c_design levels.pdf Correspondence between consultant team and Glasgow City
Council Land and Environmental Services confirming design levels
OFFICIAL and flood defence requirements.
SITE: Water Row, Govan
Pre Application Advice
Kathryn,
Further to the information previously provided by my colleagues in DRS, please find attached information relevant to
coastal flood risk regarding the River Clyde.
I confirm that the above site is within an area currently identified as partially at risk from coastal flooding during a
1:200year flood event and that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) will be required in accordance with current planning
regulations including City Plan 2: Part 4 - Development Guides DG/ENV 6: River Clyde Flood Management Strategy -
Development Guidance. The recommended design level/flood defence level would be 6.0m AOD for this site.
Link to DG/ENV 6:
http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=13625&p=0
I also attach the RCFMS document “Flood Defence Levels For Design”. The relevant section in the document that applies
to the above site would appear to be Sec_29.
Protection of buildings
The Supplementary Development Guide policy above requires that building finished floor levels should be
set at 6.0 mAOD or above for this particular site which includes allowances for freeboard, climate change and wave
action.
Roads and Footways

Policy under the City Plan 2 and Roads Development Guide require that roads and footways be set at the 1 in 200 year
level including climate change. Roads and Footways proposed for the above site would therefore require to be set at a
minimum of 5.28m AOD.
Note: Flood risk mapping is available from the SEPA web site:
http://www.sepa.org.uk/environment/water/flooding/flood-maps/
Regards,
John
John Lowe
Technical Services (Project Management)
Land & Environmental Services
Glasgow City Council
Tel: 0141 287 9073

p 124 p 125
B12
Ref P18A299707P
DDI: 020 7133 1439
Fax: 020 7623 3807
robert.skingley@howdengroup.com
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Correspondence confirming Compliance Certification,Independent
VERIFICATION OF PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE Check Certification and Professional Indemnity Insurance for the
Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Impact Assessment. Refer to
We, the undersigned Insurance Broker, hereby certify that the following described insurance is in force at this document for full details and relevance.
date:
Name of the Insured: RSK Group Limited and subsidiary companies
Period of Insurance: From: 1 March 2018 To: 28 February 2019

(both days inclusive at the address stated above)
Limit of Indemnity: GBP 5,000,000
Insurers: CNA Insurance Company Ltd

Axis Specialty Europe SE
Endurance Worldwide Insurance Ltd
Lloyd’s syndicate XLC 2003
Primary Policy No: P18A299707P
The policy is subject to the insuring agreements, exclusions, conditions and declarations contained therein.
The above is accurate at the date of signature.
This document is furnished to you as a matter of information only and is valid at today’s date. The issuance of
this document does not make the person or organisation to whom it is issued an additional Insured, nor does it
modify in any manner the contracts of insurance between the Insured and Insurers. Any amendment, change
or extension of such contracts can only be effected by specific endorsement thereto.
Should the above-mentioned contract of insurance be cancelled, assigned or changed during the above policy
period in such manner as to affect this document, no obligation to inform the holder of this document is
accepted by the undersigned or by Insurers.
Signed on behalf of Howden UK Group Limited

Signed:…………………………………… Dated 28 February 2018
Broker at 16 Eastcheap London EC3M 1BD t: +44(0)20 7133 1300 • f: +44(0)20 7133 1500 • www.howdengroup.com
Howden is a trading name of Howden UK Group Limited, part of the Hyperion Insurance Group. Howden UK Group Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in
respect of general insurance business. Registered in England and Wales under company registration number 725875. Registered Office: 16 Eastcheap, London EC3M 1BD. Calls may be
monitored and recorded for quality assurance purposes.
p 126 p 127
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL LED DEVELOPMENT, WATER B13
Proposed Residential Led Development, Water
ROW, GLASGOW
28/08/18
Row, Glasgow TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT
Reference number GB01T18D72
IDENTIFICATION TABLE
TABLE OF CONTENTS Traffic Impact Assessment
Client/Project owner Govan Housing Association
1. INTRODUCTION 6
Project Proposed Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow
1.1 GENERAL 6
Study Transport Assessment 1.2 SITE LOCATION 6
Type of document Final Report 1.3 PURPOSE OF REPORT 7
Date 28/08/18 1.4 POLICY AND GUIDANCE 7
Reference number GB01T18D72 1.5 REPORT STRUCTURE 7
Number of pages 45 2. PLANNING POLICY 8

2.1 OVERVIEW 8
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL LED DEVELOPMENT, APPROVAL 2.2 CLYDEPLAN CITYPLAN 8
WATER ROW, GLASGOW Version Name Position Date Modifications

2.3 GLASGOW DEVELOPMENT PLAN 8
Author C Flower Consultant 20/07/18 3. EXISTING TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE 10
Checked Draft Issue for 3.1 INTRODUCTION 10

1 S Livingstone Associate 20/07/18 client
by 3.2 SITE LOCATION 10
comment
Approved 3.3 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE 12
S Livingstone Associate 20/07/18
by
3.4 CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE 17
Author C Flower Consultant 28/08/18
3.5 PUBLIC TRANSPORT 20
Checked Final issue with
2 S Livingstone Associate 28/08/18 minor 3.6 SUMMARY 22
by
modifications
Approved 4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS 23
S Livingstone Associate 28/08/18
by
4.1 GENERAL 23
4.2 DEVELOPMENT LAND USE 23
4.3 VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 24
5. MEASURES TO SUPPORT TO DEVELOPMENT 26

5.1 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 26
5.2 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE 26
5.3 CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE 27
5.4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT 28
5.5 PARKING PROVISION 28
5.6 COMMITTED DEVELOPMENT PARKING RESEARCH 29
5.7 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS AND ROAD NETWORK 30
5.8 INTERNAL LAYOUT 30
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow

Transport Assessment GB01T1D72
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 3/45
p 128 p 129
B13
5.9 FRAMEWORK TRAVEL PLAN 31 LIST OF FIGURES 1. INTRODUCTION
6. TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT 32
Figure 1.1 : Strategic Area Site Location 6 1.1 General
6.1 BASE TRAFFIC DATA 32 Figure 2.1 : ClydePlan, Spatial Development Strategy 8
Figure 2.2 : Glasgow City Plan 2, Proposals Map 9 1.1.1 SYSTRA has been commissioned by Govan Housing Association (GHA) to prepare a Transport
6.2 OPENING YEAR OF DEVELOPMENT 32
Figure 3.1 : Local Area Site Location 10 Assessment (TA) in support of a proposed residential led development comprising of 253
6.3 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 32 Figure 3.2 : Provisional Bridge Design Idea 11 units and commercial space, at Water Row, Govan, south-west Glasgow.
6.4 THRESHOLD ASSESSMENT 33 Figure 3.3 : Water Row Public Consultation Options Appraisal Extract (Source:
1.1.2 Recent modifications to the site layout have amended the no. of units from 253 to 200. In 1.3 Purpose of Report
www.getintogovan.com) 11
6.5 JUNCTION ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY & REPORTING 35 order to retain flexibility for the developer, should future site investigations determine that
Figure 3.4 : General Characteristics of Water Row 12
upwards of 200 units can be delivered, the analysis within this TA is based on the initial 253 1.3.1 The purpose of this TA is to examine the current and future transport matters associated
6.6 GOVAN ROAD / NAPIER ROAD 35 Figure 3.5 : Public Realm, Govan Road / Water Row 13
units. This provides a robust assessment and a worst case scenario for the trip generation with the proposed development.
6.7 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT 36 Figure 3.6 : Pearce Lane (westbound) 13
and traffic impact assessments. In reality, the people and vehicle trips associated with the
Figure 3.7 : Pearce Street 14
development will be lower than those stated in this TA. 1.3.2 The development is likely to generate a number of people trips and while located in a highly
7. CONCLUSIONS 37 Figure 3.8 : Napier Road 14
accessible location in Glasgow, a proportion of these trips will be made by car. Scottish
Figure 3.9 : Govan Bus and Subway Station and Govan Road 15
7.1 SUMMARY 37 Figure 3.10 : Govan Road Pedestrian Crossing (facing Water Row) 15 1.2 Site Location Census Data and the TRICS database has been used to forecast the travel characteristics for
the proposed development. This takes into consideration all travel modes including
7.2 WALKING AND CYCLING 37 Figure 3.11 : Location of Local Amenities 16
1.2.1 The site is located to the south of the River Clyde, in a central location in Govan and is pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users as well as vehicular access requirements and
Figure 3.12 : Location of Local Amenities 17
7.3 PUBLIC TRANSPORT 38 approximately 4.4km to the west of Glasgow City Centre, as indicated in Figure 1.1. parking.
Figure 3.13 : Govan Riverside Walkway 18
7.4 DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT AND OPERATION 38 Figure 3.14 : GCC’s ‘The Glasgow Cycle Map’ Extract 18 1.3.3 The TA also provides an analysis of any anticipated off-site transport impacts on the local
Figure 3.15 : NextBike Cycle Hire Station 19 road network and determines whether the existing transportation network is suitable to
7.5 TRAFFIC IMPACT 38 Figure 3.16 : Local Cycling Routes 20 accommodate the proposed development without detriment to existing users.
7.6 FRAMEWORK TRAVEL PLAN 39 Figure 3.17 : Glasgow Subway Stopping Points 21
Figure 5.1 : Proposed Site Layout 26 1.3.4 The TA is informed by scoping discussions with Glasgow City Council and a site visit,
7.7 CONCLUSIONS 39
undertaken on the 5th June 2018.
A. TRICS OUTPUTS 40
LIST OF TABLES 1.4 Policy and Guidance
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT 41
1.4.1 The TA has been prepared in accordance with both national and local transportation policy,
C. FRAMEWORK TRAVEL PLAN 42 Table 3.1 : Approximate Distances & Walking Times to Amenities 16
with particular reference made to:
Table 3.2 : Approximate Distances & Cycling Times to Amenities 19
D. TRAFFIC DIAGRAMS 43 Table 4.1 : Trip Generation, from TRICS (253 units) 23  Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), 2014 update;
Table 4.2 : Residential Mode Share (based on Datashine Analysis) 24  Planning Advice Note (PAN) 75, ‘Planning for Transport’;
E. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OUTPUTS 44 Table 4.3 : Vehicle Distribution and Assignment 25
Table 5.1 : Cycle Parking Provision 27  Transport Scotland’s, “Transport Assessment Guidance” (TAG);
Table 5.2 : Car Parking Provision 28  Scottish Government’s “Designing Streets”;
Table 6.1 : Development Traffic Generation 32
Table 6.2 : Distribution of Development Traffic 33  GCC’s Design Guide for New Residential Development; and
Figure 1.1 : Strategic Area Site Location
Table 6.3 : Threshold Assessment (AM Peak) 34  Glasgow City Development Plan, 2017.
Table 6.4 : Threshold Assessment (PM Peak) 34 1.2.2 The site was once part of the Harland and Wolff Shipyards which was demolished in the
Table 6.5 : Govan Road / Napier Road Junction Assessment Results 36 1970s. The site and general Govan area has been subject to significant regeneration in recent 1.5 Report Structure
years and currently has two main land uses. The western part of the site is occupied by a
gated showpeople site and a car park occupies the eastern part of the site. The car park acts 1.5.1 Following on from with introductory chapter, the structure of the report is as follows:
as an informal park and ride as it is in close proximity to Govan Bus and Subway stations. The
 Chapter 2 - Planning Policy;
car park also hosts Govan Market on fortnightly Saturdays.
 Chapter 3 – Existing Transport Infrastructure;
 Chapter 4 – Proposed Development Travel Characteristics;
 Chapter 5 – Measures to Support the Development;
 Chapter 6 – Traffic Impact Assessment; and
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72  Chapter 7 – Summary and Conclusions.
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 4/45 Final Report 28/08/18 Page 5/45 Final Report 28/08/18 Page 6/45
p 130 p 131
B13
2. PLANNING POLICY 3. EXISTING TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
2.1 Overview 3.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Development in Scotland must adhere to National policy guidance in the form of the Scottish 3.1.1 This section considers the existing conditions adjacent to the site based on the hierarchy
National Planning Framework, this policy is directed through Strategic and Local Plans which assessment set out in the TAG document issued by Transport Scotland. This sets out the road 3.2.5 Associated with the Glasgow City Region City Deal proposals for a new foot bridge linking
are implemented at local area level. The Strategic and Local policy related to the proposed user hierarchy where more sustainable modes of travel are prioritised ahead of the private Govan to Partick have been approved with construction planned to start in 2019. This bridge
development are set out, as follows. car. will have a positive impact on the regeneration of Govan, enhancing sustainable connections
between the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QUEH) campus to the west and Pacific
2.2 Clydeplan Cityplan 3.2 Site Location Quay to the east.
2.2.1 The site is zoned for housing within the ClydePlan Strategic Development Plan, July 2017. As 3.2.1 The site occupies land to the east and west of Water Row, with the eastern section of the 3.2.6 Figure 3.2 shows the provisional bridge design idea that was published by CH2M who are
illustrated by Figure 2.1, Water Row is allocated as a Social Housing Development Site. It is site currently operating as a car park with approximately 200 parked cars observed on the developing the bridge.
zoned for an indicative capacity of 100 units, with a guideline program of constuction to be day of the site visit. The land to the west of Water Row comprises a gated showpeople site
delivered between 2017 – 2024. and grassland. Water Row connects from Govan Road to the Govan Riverside Walkway,
providing direct access from the site onto this pedestrian/cycle path.
3.2.2 In the surrounding area, the site is bounded by the River Clyde to the north, mixed residential
Figure 2.2 : Glasgow City Plan 2, Proposals Map development to the east, Govan Old Church to the west and a mix of commercial and retail
units and public realm fronting onto Govan Road, to the south.
2.3.3 Policy DEV 2 states that the Council will support proposals in this area which enhance
residential amenity, improve access to/from and within the existing area and preserve and 3.2.3 The site is well positioned in a central urban area which is close to local amenities and
enhance the integrity of the townscape, landscape and green network provision. services. The site has access to a variety of local facilities and amenities within a short walk
including, Govan Bus and Subway Station, Govan Cross Shopping Centre, Govan Old Church,
Govan New Church and a post office.
3.2.4 The site in relation to the local area is indicated by Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.2 : Provisional Bridge Design Idea

Site Location
3.2.7 Figure 3.3 shows an example of the placement of the bridge and its connection to Govan
Road. This image has been extracted from the Water Row Masterplan public consultation
which discussed various options for development of the site with the community. The
placement and design of the bridge is in early stages and may change, these images have
Figure 2.1 : ClydePlan, Spatial Development Strategy
simply been obtained to provide greater visual context to the site’s connection to the north
side of the River.
2.3 Glasgow Development Plan
2.3.1 The recently published Glasgow Development Plan, adopted March 2017 sets out the policies
and guidelines for development in Glasgow. As part of this plan, A Strategic Development
Framework is currently being prepared for the Govan/Partick area (Policy CPD2).
2.3.2 The site was allocated for Residential and Supporting Uses in Glasgow City Plan 2. This plan
is now superseded by the above plan, however for establishing the current planning policy
position for the site the proposed development plans are in line with the City Plan 2 policy
guidance. The site and Policy DEV 2, Residential and Supporting Uses are indicated in the City Figure 3.1 : Local Area Site Location
Plan 2 Map extract, in Figure 2.2 below.
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72
Figure 3.3 : Water Row Public Consultation (Source: CollectiveArchitecture)
p 132 Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow p 133

B13
3.3 Pedestrian Infrastructure
3.3.1 The immediate local area has good quality pedestrian facilities in the form of footways,
dropped kerbs, tactile paving, dedicated crossing facilities and street lighting. Recent public
realm improvements on Govan Road (directly to the south of the site) provide high quality
public realm space, with level surfaces, wide footways, seating areas and crossing points.
3.3.2 The proposed development is likely to have multiple pedestrian access points on Water Row,
Napier Street, Pearce Lane and Pearce Street all of which connect to Govan Road. Further
pedestrian connections are available to Wanlock Street and Napier Terrace, to the west and
east of the site, respectively.
3.3.3 The pedestrian facilities on these streets are set out, as follows:
Water Row
Figure 3.5 : Public Realm, Govan Road / Water Row
3.3.4 Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 illustrate the general characteristics of Water Row. It has wide, even Figure 3.7 : Pearce Street
surface footways with dropped kerbs and tactile paving indicating crossing points. Double Pearce Street and Pearce Lane
yellow lines indicate parking restrictions along the southern section of the street, Napier Road
approaching the River. This ensures that the approach to Govan Riverside Walkway, and 3.3.5 Figure 3.6 illustrates the general characteristics of Pearce Lane, facing westbound from
Govan Ferry is clear of on-street parking, enhancing the local environment for pedestrians. Water Row. In its present condition Pearce Lane has narrow footways and although parking Figure 3.9 : Govan Bus and Subway Station and Govan Road
3.3.7 Napier Road is a residential street and therefore pedestrian facilities are appropriate for the
restrictions are in place, it was noted on the site visit that there were cars parked on double
nature of the proposed development. Figure 3.8 indicates the general conditions of Napier
yellow lines and on the land on the other side of the carriageway. Given that the
Road, detailing wide footways and a pleasant pedestrian environment.
development will be accessed from this lane it will be re-developed as part of the proposals
and redeveloped to appropriate standards.
Figure 3.4 : General Characteristics of Water Row
Figure 3.10 : Govan Road Pedestrian Crossing (facing Water Row)
3.3.9 Table 3.1 details the distances and approximate pedestrian walking times from the site to a
Figure 3.8 : Napier Road number of amenities and key destinations. Walking times are calculated using Google Maps,
Figure 3.6 : Pearce Lane (westbound) with the assumption of an average walking speed of 1.4m/s (IHT Providing for Journeys on
Govan Road Foot). The walking times in red indicate the change in time and distance once the new bridge
3.3.6 Figure 3.7 highlights that footways on Pearce Street are of an adequate quality, and are
is operational, improving connections to the north side of the River.
sufficient for pedestrian use. 3.3.8 Govan Road has been subject to a number of public realm enhancements over the recent
years. Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10 details the public space adjacent to the Bus and Subway
Station, which lies to the south of the site. Govan Road has good quality footways, dedicated
signalised pedestrian crossing points and guard railing in place. Bus Stops have shelters, real-
time travel information and seating.
p 134 p 135
B13
Table 3.1 : Approximate Distances & Walking Times to Amenities 3.3.11 Figure 3.12 highlights 800m, 1600m and 2400m walking isochrones from the development
Local Amenities Current Situation With Bridge in Place site which approximates to 10, 20 and 30 minute walking time from the site. This shows that
a large area of Govan and south-west Glasgow is currently accessible from the site on foot.
Walking Walking Walking Walking
Distance Time Distance Time
The delivery of the Clyde footbridge will open up this area of Govan to the northern Bank of
Govan Subway Station 50 m 1 min 50 m 1 min the River. This will greatly enhance the connectivity of the site, allowing resident’s to walk to
Govan Shopping Centre 60 m 1 min 60 m 1 min the north of the River and connect to Glasgow’s West and central areas on foot.
Local Supermarkets 60m 1 min 60m 1 min
Govan Bus Station 100 m 2 mins 100 m 2 mins
The Pearce Community Centre 120 m 2 mins 120 m 2 mins
Govan Free Church of Scotland 120 m 2 mins 120 m 2 mins
St. Anthony's Roman Catholic Church 250 m 3 mins 250 m 3 mins
Govan Post Office 350 m 4 mins 350 m 4 mins
Napier Street Bus Stop (Fastlink) 400 m 5 mins 400 m 5 mins
Riverside Primary School 500 m 7 mins 500 m 7 mins
Elder Park Greenspace 700 m 9 mins 700 m 9 mins
Elder Park Library & Learning Centre 800 m 10 mins 800 m 10 mins Figure 3.13 : Govan Riverside Walkway
Cartvale High School 800 m 10 mins 800 m 10 mins
Govan Health Centre 1.20 km 15 mins 1.20 km 15 mins 3.4.2 Glasgow’s Strategic Plan for Cycling 2016-2025 sets out aspirations for enhancing cycle links
Pirie Park Primary School 1.40 km 17 mins 1.40 km 17 mins throughout Glasgow which includes high level plans to develop further cycle routes within
St. Constantine's Primary & Nursery School 1.40 km 17 mins 1.40 km 17 mins Govan. The Glasgow Cycle Map insert in Figure 3.14 illustrates the sites potential connectivity
QEUH 1.60 km 19 mins 1.60 km 19 mins to formal cycle infrastructure, bike storage and routes.
Asda Govan Superstore 1.80 km 23 mins 1.80 km 23 mins
Govan High School 2.00 km 25 mins 2.00 km 25 mins
SEC Centre / SSE Hydro 2.50 km 32 min 1.36 km 16 min
Glasgow Science Centre, Pacific Quay 2.10 km 26 mins 2.10 km 26 mins Figure 3.15 : NextBike Cycle Hire Station
Riverside Transport Museum 3.70 km 46 min 700 m 8 min
Figure 3.12 : Location of Local Amenities
3.4.5 The approximate distance and cycle times to local amenities and points of interest are set
3.3.10 The location of the site in relation to some of these local amenities is illustrated by Figure out in Table 3.2.
3.11, highlighting that the site is in an excellent location to connect to a number of amenities 3.3.12 It should be noted that the walking and cycling links to the north of the River Clyde will be
and points of interest (note that links to 1 and 2 will be available with the completion of the Table 3.2 : Approximate Distances & Cycling Times to Amenities
available with the new bridge. Local Amenities Current Situation With Bridge in Place
new bridge across the River Clyde.
3.4 Cycling Infrastructure Site Location
Cycling Cycling Cycling Cycling
Distance Time Distance Time
Govan Subway Station 50 m < 1 min 50 m < 1 min
3.4.1 Glasgow is well connected by various cycle routes including National Cycle Routes and Core Govan Shopping Centre 60 m < 1 min 60 m < 1 min
Paths. The ‘on’ and ‘off road’ cycle routes in proximity to the site area detailed below: Local Supermarkets 60 m < 1 min 60 m < 1 min
Govan Bus Station 100 m 1 min 100 m 1 min
 ‘On’ road cycle lane on Govan Road; The Pearce Community Centre 120 m 1 min 120 m 1 min
Govan Free Church of Scotland 120 m 1 min 120 m 1 min
 Core Path C30A which connects Water Row to Elder Park; St. Anthony's Roman Catholic Church 260 m 1 min 260 m 1 min
Govan Post Office 350 m 2 mins 350 m 2 mins
 Core Path 109A which connects Water Row to Pacific Quay along the bank of the Napier Street Bus Stop (Fastlink) 450 m 2 mins 450 m 2 mins
Clyde; Figure 3.14 : GCC’s ‘The Glasgow Cycle Map’ Extract Riverside Primary School 500 m 2 mins 500 m 2 mins
Elder Park Greenspace 700 m 3 mins 700 m 3 mins
 National Cycle Route 7 which connects Ayr, Glasgow and Inverness. In the 3.4.3 The new Clyde Bridge will also improve connections for cyclists, opening up a more direct Cartvale High School 800 m 3 mins 800 m 3 mins
immediate local area it provides links to Partick and Clydebank to the west and route to the ‘off road’ cycle paths (as shown in green in the Figure). This has the potential to Elder Park Library & Learning Centre 950 m 4 mins 950 m 4 mins
Glasgow city centre to the north. Connections are possible to Paisley to the south- provide a direct traffic-free route from Water Row into Glasgow City Centre.
Govan Health Centre 1.30 km 4 mins 1.30 km 4 mins
St. Constantine's Primary & Nursery School 1.40 km 5 mins 1.40 km 5 mins
west and Rutherglen to the south-east as well;
Pirie Park Primary School 1.50 km 5 mins 1.50 km 5 mins
 Langlands Footpath/Cyclepath connecting to Elder Park; and 3.4.4 The existing conditions for cyclists on the immediate surrounding road network are QEUH 1.60 km 7 mins 1.60 km 7 mins
considered adequate to support cyclists, as given the urban nature of Govan, generally Asda Govan Superstore 2.10 km 8 mins 2.10 km 8 mins
 The Govan Riverside Walkway, directly to the south of the site, as illustrated in vehicle speeds are quite low (30mph and below). Cycle hire facilities are available on Water SEC Centre / SSE Hydro 2.10 km 6 mins 2.10 km 6 mins
Queen Elizabeth University Hospital 2.10 km 7 mins 2.10 km 7 mins
Figure 3.13. Row, with a dedicated NextBike hire facility. For commuters to cycle and then travel by bus Govan High School 2.10 km 7 mins 2.10 km 7 mins
Figure 3.11 : Location of Local Amenities or subway there are Sheffield cycle parking racks available adjacent to Govan Bus Station. Springfield Quay Leisure Centre 3.40 km 11 mins 3.40 km 11 mins
These parking facilities are indicated by Figure 3.15. Glasgow City Centre (Queen Street Station) 4.80 km 16 mins 4.20 km 13 mins
SEC Centre / SSE Hydro 2.5 km 10 mins 2.00 km 7 mins
Riverside Transport Museum 4.10 km 13 min 700m 3 min
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow 3.4.6 Figure 3.16 illustrates the distance that can be reached by cycling from Govan. It can be
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 seen that a large proportion of Glasgow can be reached within a 30 minute cycle of the site.
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 16/45 Final Report 28/08/18 Page 17/45 Final Report 28/08/18 Page 18/45 As previously noted, this distance will be greater upon the delivery of the new Bridge.
p 136 p 137
B13
3.5.13 To the west, Govan Road connects to the A739 which links to the M8. Travelling eastbound,
Govan Road connects to Paisley Road which connects to King George V Bridge, routing to
Glasgow City Centre.
3.5.14 Parking Locations in Govan
3.5.15 The development of the site will remove the car park which is currently operating as an
informal park and ride. The car park is well used, and site visit observations indicated 4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS
approximately 200 cars parked in bays, with instances of parking on footways and unmarked
spaces taking the count to over 200 cars. SYSTRA’s online research indicated that the car park
4.1 General
has a designed capacity of 70 spaces.
4.1.1 Scottish Government policies and guidelines focus on achieving a sustainable and integrated
3.5.16 There are a number of local streets in Govan within proximity to the Govan Bus and Subway
transport provision, dealing with reducing reliance on private cars and promoting greater use
Stations such as, Harmony Row, Helen Street, Broomloan Road and Orkney Street. These
of public transport, and walking and cycling as alternatives. A TA should not be on the basis
streets have unallocated parking which, as with Water Row are free to park.
of accommodating car trips by creating more road space and capacity through junction
Figure 3.17 : Glasgow Subway Stopping Points 3.5.17 SYSTRA has not undertaken a review into the potential on-street parking capacity of these improvements, but should be balanced with more sustainable modes of transport.
Figure 3.16 : Local Cycling Routes streets, however, on-site observations indicated that all aforementioned streets did have
Rail Services 4.2 Development Land Use
some capacity to accommodate bay parking. Nevertheless, SYSTRA would note that it would
3.5 Public Transport 3.5.7 The closest rail link to the site is currently Cardonald Rail Station which is approximately not be the responsibility of the applicant to replace or consider in detail, the loss of this
informal parking facility. 4.2.1 The development is residential led but will also comprise of commercial/community uses.
2.8km (25 minutes walk from Water Row). For end residents of the site bus and subway travel The Govan Housing Association is relocating from McKechnie Street which is 300m to the
3.5.1 The site is located to a number of public transport connections. Govan Bus Station is located may be more likely modes of daily travel into Glasgow City Centre. For those travelling from west of the site a gym/café community facility is also proposed and will be used by new
100m to the south of the site, on Govan Road. Further bus stop are available on Govan Road, Govan to Inverclyde, Cardonald Rail Station offers overground rail services between Glasgow 3.6 Summary
Golspie Street, Orkney Street and Helen Street. The bus stops closest to the site are equipped residents and the wider Govan community.
City and Gourock. Linked public transport trips are possible by using one of the many services
with shelters and timetable information and offer frequent connections to Braehead, operating from Govan Bus Station. 3.6.1 It is evident that the site is highly accessible by a range of transport modes. The pedestrian
4.2.2 The trip generation associated with the HGA and community facility will be linked to the
Glasgow City Centre, QEUH, Patrick, Hillington Estate and Mount Florida as well as other and cycle facilities in the vicinity of the site, including the Govan Riverside Walkway and
residential development and it is expected that there will be a high degree of new residents
strategic locations. 3.5.8 The new bridge will provide access to Partick Station which offers low level rail services and proposed Clyde footbridge ensure that areas to the north, south, east and west of Water
and others in the local area using the facilities. This means that there will be a high number
is an interchange Station for Glasgow Subway services. With the new bridge in place it is Row can be accessed from the site. The local road network provides strong connections to
3.5.2 The combination of bus services provides a peak time (Monday – Friday) frequency of of linked trips from these elements of the development and therefore no ‘new’ trips will be
located approximately 900m (10 mins walk) to the north of Water Row. existing transport services connecting to other parts of the City.
approximately 20 buses per hour. On a Saturday this level of service provision reduces to generated.
approximately 12-15 services per hour. 3.5.9 Partick Rail Station offers a wide range of services with trains to Dalmuir, Edinburgh, Larkhall, 3.6.2 There is a high frequency of bus and subway services as Govan Bus and Subway Stations are
4.2.3 TRICS Analysis
Dumbarton and Milngavie at regular intervals. The Station is staffed part-time, and has cycle within the 400m of the site. This is within the accepted guidelines of PAN75, providing
3.5.3 The bus services travelling on Golspie Road have the benefit of the Fastlink Bus Corridor storage for 22 bikes. onward connections to Glasgow City Centre, South Lanarkshire and other urban areas within 4.2.4 SYSTRA interrogated the TRICS database to calculate a people trip generation appropriate to
which is a dedicated bus priority link connecting Glasgow City Centre, as well as other a 5 minute walk of the site. The new bridge will enhance connections to the north of the the location of the site. The ‘Residential’ and ‘Flats Privately Owned’ land use categories in
strategic locations. Govan Ferry River, creating links to Partick Station. order to provide a robust assessment. Table 4.1 indicates the trip rate and corresponding
3.5.4 This provides an excellent opportunity for end-users of the proposed development to people trip generation.
3.5.10 The Govan Ferry is a free shuttle ferry service running in the summer months which departs
bus/subway or on foot locally within Govan, or further afield to other parts of Glasgow. from the pontoon at the end of Water Row. It offers connections to the north Bank of the Table 4.1 : Trip Generation, from TRICS (253 units)
Clyde.
3.5.5 Glasgow Subway Weekday AM Peak 08:00-09:00 Weekday PM Peak 17:00 - 18:00
Local Road Network In Out Total In Out Total
3.5.6 Govan Subway Station is located next to Govan Bus Station, less than 100m to the south of People Trip Rate 0.095 0.454 0.549 0.475 0.201 0.676
the site. It provides frequent access (services approximately every 4 minutes at commuter 3.5.11 The site is proposed to connect to the local road network via three main access points.
peaks) to Glasgow City Centre, the West End and South Side. A map of the Subway stopping People Trips 24 115 139 120 51 171
Vehicular access is to be provided via Pearce Street, Water Row and Napier Road. All of these
points is shown by Figure 3.17. (253 units)
streets connect to Govan Road via priority junction arrangements. Local roads surrounding
the site are covered by a 30mph speed limit.
4.2.5 In total, the proposed development is forecast to generate 139 and 171 two-way people trips
3.5.12 Govan Road is a good standard single carriageway road running in a two-way east-west in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
direction. It is approximately 12m wide in the vicinity of the site and functions with a mix of
kerbside parking and temporary waiting areas in parts. 4.2.6 Mode Split
4.2.7 In order to consider how residents are likely to travel SYSTRA has analysed the Datashine
Scotland Commute website (www.scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk). This website
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow
compiles Scotland’s Census and National Records of Scotland data to provide mode share
transport information for zones across Scotland. The Govan and Linthouse data zone was
used for analysis as the site is located within this zone.
p 138 p 139
B13
4.2.8 Data was obtained for the mode of travel for trips departing from home travelling to work. Table 4.3 : Vehicle Distribution and Assignment
5. MEASURES TO SUPPORT TO DEVELOPMENT
The mode share split for the development, based on the census area mode split is detailed
in Table 4.2.
5.1 Development Proposals
Table 4.2 : Residential Mode Share (based on Datashine Analysis)
5.1.1 The following section considers the integration of the proposed development into the
surrounding transport network by all modes. The development will comprise of: 5.2.2 This, alongside the proximity of bus and subway connections provides excellent connections
 Up to 253 units; to a variety of transport modes. In the long term this can promote sustainable travel habits
The distribution shows that end-users of the site will travel to the north, south, east and west and improve health and fitness when comparing it to travelling by private car.
 Commercial spaces, potentially community gym/café facility; and
of the site to work with the greatest attraction area being Govan Road, traveling eastbound.
It can be seen that number of vehicle trips generated by the development is very low. The  Relocation of GHA offices 5.2.3 In order to maximise the potential number of pedestrian trips generated by the proposed
distribution and assignment of these trips are provided in Appendix A. development, it will be designed with multiple pedestrian access points and through routes.
5.1.2 Figure 5.1 illustrates an indicative layout of the proposed development, which is also included Delivering a permeable layout will create a welcoming pedestrian environment and
in Appendix B of this report. promotes low vehicle speeds.
5.2.4 As part of the new bridge proposals, Water Row will act as the primary connection to the
bridge on the south side of the River. The existing public realm is sufficient in this area to deal
4.2.9 In total, the proposed development is forecasted to generate 42 and 51 two-way vehicle trips with the additional pedestrian and cyclist numbers that will travel this route.
in the AM and PM peak, respectively.
5.2.5 The Glasgow Harbour Development which is in pre-planning stages includes proposals to
4.2.10 Given the assessible location a high number of trips will be made by public transport. This is improve the pedestrian and cycle connections throughout its adjacent area. This will further
supported by the high percentage of existing residents in the Govan and Linthouse zone that improve the connections along the river between Water Row and Pacific Quay.
travel by sustainable modes. A large proportion of residents travel by bus (19%) which
equates to 26 and 32 trips forecasted in the AM and PM peaks, respectively. 5.2.6 In additional to being accessible by sustainable modes of transport, the site is also well placed
to take advantage of strong links to the local and strategic road network, ensuring that the
4.2.11 Glasgow subway accounts for 26% of trips with 36 and 44 two-way trips made by subway or site is accessible by a range of modes. There, the site is well served by a range of sustainable
train. and public transport infrastructure services, giving various options for commuting and other
journeys to be made by other means than a private car.
4.2.12 Based on this data a high proportion of trips are made on foot with 20% of residents in the
Govan and Linthouse area currently walking to work. This accounts to 28 and 35 two-way
trips made in the peak hours for those walking to work from home.
5.3 Cycling Infrastructure
4.2.13 The ‘Travel to Work’ data highlights that cycling accounts for 0% of trips. It is expected that 5.3.1 The existing cycling facilities in the vicinity of the proposed development are of an acceptable
once the new bridge is complete the number of trips made by walking and cycling will quality for an urban area. There is cycle hire (Nextbike) facilities on the site at present, and it
increase, particularly for cyclists as the bridge will open up opportunities to cycle routes on would be recommended that these are incorporated into the site layout or re-positioned
the north bank of the River. As a result of these enhanced connections to the north side of locally so that residents can have the benefit of them.
the River for walking and cycling the number of trips made by public transport may be
5.3.2 In terms of cycling in the local area, Water Row is a designated ‘on’ road Core Path with Core
reduced. Figure 5.1 : Proposed Site Layout
Path 109A and NCR 7 also within proximity to the site. It is expected that proficient cyclists
5.1.3 The development will be accessed via three access points; Pearce Street, Water Row and can travel comfortably on the main carriageways of local roads. The low speeds (30mph or
4.3 Vehicle Distribution and Assignment less) in the local area promote Govan as being conducive to on road cycling.
Napier Lane and is proposed to be constructed in a phased manner.
4.3.1 The distribution of vehicle trips to and from the proposed development is based on Datashine 5.3.3 CDP Supplementary Planning Guidance SG11 sets out the cycle parking provision required
2011 Census Data using the ‘Travel to Work’ option. The distribution patterns have been used 5.2 Pedestrian Infrastructure for new residential development, as shown in Table 5.1.
to assign the development trips to the local road network using the most appropriate route
to and from the development. 5.2.1 Government guidelines indicate a hierarchy of travel modes with walking being the highest Table 5.1 : Cycle Parking Provision
and most sustainable form of travel. Whilst encouraging travel on foot may not be
4.3.2 Table 4.3 indicates the assignment to the local road network to and from the site, by appropriate for longer distance journeys, the site is well located to take advantage of the
percentage of total trips, and two-way vehicle trips in both the AM and PM peak periods. existing high-quality pedestrian footway network and well-designed public open spaces.
p 140 p 141
B13
5.3.4 Within the development, cycle parking will be provided in line with GCC local planning unit, however given the highly accessible location of the development and the following suggested policy levels. Application 14/02458/DC for 82 flats at 29 Nethan Street was
guidance. Secure bike stores will be available for resident and visitor use in each communal policy notes which provide guidance for justifying a variance from the basic standards. There approved in 2015. This development was approved planning consent based on a parking
stairwall. The store will be located in a convenient location which is accessible and useable. is a case for GCC accepting the proposed number of spaces, as follows; provision of 52% and the proposed development provides a provision of 68%. This similarity
in provision and the fact that it was accepted by GCC should be taken as a locally-specific
 Public Transport Accessibility - provision below the basic standard may be
5.4 Public Transport considered in areas of High Accessibility;
example for the expected car usage and ownership levels in the Govan area.
5.4.1 There are a number of bus services operating on Govan Road and from Govan Bus Station. In  House size and house form - (i.e flatted accommodation with the lowest 5.7 Development Access and Road Network
addition, the Govan Subway station adjacent provides further connections to other areas of requirement, through terraced and semi-detached, to detached with the highest
Glasgow. Both are within the suggested 400m walking distance from the centre of the requirement); and 5.7.1 It is proposed that the development will have three points of vehicular access. The main 5.9 Framework Travel Plan
proposed development. This is the suggested maximum walking distance to a public  Car availability by household in the surrounding area. access will be Water Row, with secondary accesses from Pearce Street and Napier Road. A
transport service for a new development according to PAN75 and the CCC CDP. pedestrian/cycle access is available from The Govan Riverside Walkway, and via Wanlock 5.9.1 Once the development is operational a Travel Plan (TP) could be prepared for new residents.
5.5.5 Section 2 of the SG11 Policy states the factors important when locating new development. It Street and Napier Terrace. A TP seeks to encourage travel by walking, cycling, public transport and car sharing by
5.4.2 The completion of the new bridge will also provide a viable alternative for residents travelling makes reference to SPP (paragraph 279) stating that; implementing site-specific measures. The consequence of this is that single occupancy car
by train or subway providing connections to public transport opportunities on the northern 5.8 Internal Layout trips have the potential to be reduced. TPs are frequently prepared as a planning
side of the Clyde. Partick Subway Station is located 800m to the north of the site, which is requirement once permission has been approved. A framework residential TP for the
approximately 10 minutes walk from the development. ‘significant travel-generating uses should be sited at locations which are well served by public 5.8.1 The development will be designed in accordance with the principles of Designing Streets proposed development is provided in Appendix C.
transport, subject to parking restraint policies and supported by measures to promote the which advocates a change in the way streets are designed, adopted and maintained to
5.5 Parking Provision availability of high quality public transport services’. provide less dominance of the private car and promote quality spaces for all users. The
overall aim can be summarised as:
5.5.1 When calculating the parking requirements for a proposed development, it is important to 5.5.6 There is a general acceptance that planning permission should not be granted in locations
strike a balance between accommodating the likely parking demands for the residents to which would increase the reliance on car travel. “Streets should not be designed just to accommodate the movement of motor vehicles. It is
avoid problems with overspill parking onto the surrounding roads, whilst supporting important that designers place the highest priority on meeting the needs of pedestrians, cyclist
sustainable transport objectives. 5.5.7 The site is zoned within a ‘High Accessibility Zone’ which indicates a high standard of public and public transport users so that growth in these modes of travel is encouraged in line with
transport service that facilitates use without a timetable, with minimum waiting times and sustainable travel.”
5.5.2 Paragraph 273 of SPP which is promoted within Section 2.5 of the SG11: Sustainable little impact from service disruptions. In the High Accessibility Zones there are more than 12
Transport Supplementary Guidance sets out that; buses per hour, which in is line with the public transport availability for the Water Row 5.8.2 The development will also be designed in accordance with GCC’s Design Guide for New
proposed development. Residential Areas. The core principle of ‘Design for Movement; is considered within the
document, and encourages new developments to focus on these issues:
“New development should maximise the extent to which its travel demands are met firstly 5.5.8 The Datashine outputs in Section 4.2.6 demonstrates that non-car based travel modes
account for a significant proportion of overall trip making by the established local population.  Create an integrated permeable network of streets, footways, paths and spaces
through walking, then cycling then public transport and then finally through the use of private
cars” Combined, public transport, walking and cycling trips account for 70% of total trip-making, that are conveniently connected and offer a choice of movement;
whereas car use accounts for just 30% of overall activity. While these statistics relate to  Provide pedestrian and cycle desire lines which link to the surrounding network and
5.5.3 Table 3.1 of GCC’S CDP Supplementary Planning Guidance SG11: Sustainable Development established residential travel patterns, they demonstrate that the supporting infrastructure these should not be segregated from the local road network;
document sets out the desired minimum parking provision required for new residential is capable of supporting the typical demands of users. It is reasonable to assume that
development. Table 5.2 sets this out below;  Provide key links to the local footway network which will provide onward
residents of the development will adopt similar routines.
connections to existing local community facilities, schools, shops, public transport,
Table 5.2 : Car Parking Provision hospitals etc; and
5.5.9 Further to this, Scottish 2011 Census Data suggests that the average number of cars or vans
per household is 1.0. Locally specific Govan Postcode Data (output S00116259 and  Ensure all dwellings are served by a potentially adoptable road.
S00115332) state that the average car or van ownership levels in Govan are much lower at
0.2 and 0.3, respectively. 5.8.3 The development will be designed to promote a safe environment for pedestrians and
cyclists and will be designed in a way that reduces vehicle speeds to a maximum of 20mph
5.5.10 The management of the car parking spaces will be discussed in further planning stages with through a combination of measures such as shared surfaces and road markings. Vehicle
GCC but it is suggested that spaces are de-coupled from flats. Residents will have the option speeds are likely to be low as the development is not a through-route. All vehicular traffic
to rent a car parking space and this will be based on a criteria and cost set out by GHA. associated with the development will either be residents, visitors or the occasional
service/delivery vehicle who will either be short-stay or parking on site.
5.6 Committed Development Parking Research
5.6.1 In order to justify the reduction in car parking provision it has been suggested by GCC that
5.5.4 The development is proposing a total of 136 parking spaces, which based on the provision precedent could be taken from other recent residential proposals in Govan. By using recent
detailed above is lower than the required standards. The provision suggests one space per examples this may support the justification for proposing a provision which is lower than the
p 142 p 143
B13
6. TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT Table 6.2 : Distribution of Development Traffic Table 6.3 : Threshold Assessment (AM Peak)
6.1 Base Traffic Data

6.1.1 Following discussions with GCC, an initial area of influence was identified for the traffic
impact assessment with the agreed junctions listed below:
 Govan Road / Golspie Road (signal junction)
6.4.3 The threshold assessment indicates that the maximum predicted average percentage impact
 Govan Road / Napier Road, is 4.6% at the Govan Road / Napier Road priority junction. Using the adopted 10% or greater
6.3.3 Turn count diagrams showing development traffic, and the Base + Development 2020 AM
Govan Road / Orkney Street; and threshold, the Govan Road / Napier Road requires detailed capacity analysis.
 and PM scenarios are provided in Appendix D.
 Golspie Street / Helen Street (signal junction) 6.5 Junction Assessment Methodology & Reporting
6.4 Threshold Assessment
6.1.2 In agreement with GCC, junction turning count (JTC) data was collected for the AM (07:30- 6.5.1 There are three points at which development traffic will directly access the road network:
09:30) and PM (16:30-18:30). 6.4.1 A threshold assessment was carried out at each of the junctions identified in Section 6.1,
SYSTRA have considered (agreed through consultation with GCC) that a percentage impact  Govan Road / Pearce Street;
6.1.3 The observed peak hours were: of 10% or greater at any junction in the study area would trigger the requirement for a
 Govan Road / Water Row;
detailed junction assessment.
 AM 07:30-08:30; and  Govan Road / Napier Road priority junction;
 PM 16:30-17:30. 6.4.2 Based on the vehicle trip generation and assignment, we have undertaken a threshold
assessment to determine the percentage increase in traffic movements associated with the 6.5.2 Junctions 8, the industry standard software for the assessment of priority junctions, has been
6.1.4 Turn count diagrams for the observed Base 2018 AM and PM peak hours are provided in proposed development. A summary of the AM and PM peak hour results are presented in used to undertake traffic impact analysis. Full input and output files for each junction are
Appendix D. Table 6.3 and Table 6.4 respectively. provided in Appendix E.
6.2 Opening Year of Development Table 6.4 : Threshold Assessment (PM Peak) 6.5.3 Junctions 8 reports the Ratio of Flow Capacity (RFC) and maximum forecast queue for each
of the give-way movements within the priority junction. General engineering design
6.2.1 The opening year of the proposed development is 2020. An NRTF Low growth factor of 1.016 principles as set out in the DMRB are that when assessing a priority junction or roundabout,
has been applied to factor the 2018 base flows to 2020. No committed developments were RFC levels should not exceed 0.85 in order for the junction to operate within ‘practical’
identified that would significantly affect future traffic flows in the area. capacity. Should the RFC level exceed 1.0 then the junction is operating above ‘theoretical’
capacity.
6.2.2 Turn count diagrams for the Base 2020 AM and PM peak hours are provided in Appendix D.
6.5.4 Pearce Street and Water Row are minor cul-de-sacs, and the small amount of predicted
6.3 Development Traffic development traffic is unlikely to have a significant impact on existing low flows. These
junctions have therefore not been considered further in the TA.
6.3.1 Table 6.1 Development Traffic Generation summarises the total number of vehicle trips
generated by the development in the peak periods, as set out in Section 4. Table 6.1 : 6.5.5 Napier Road is more highly trafficked as it provides access to the residential streets of Napier
Development Traffic Generation Place and Napier Terrace, as well as the public car park on Napier Road itself, and parking for
the Council offices that front onto Govan Road.
6.5.6 The operation of the Napier Road junction has been considered in the following scenarios:
 Base 2018;
 Base 2020; and
 Base 2020 + Development.
6.3.2 Development traffic was assigned to the local road network using the proportions set out in
6.6 Govan Road / Napier Road
Table 6.2. 6.6.1 The junction modelling that has been undertaken considers the Govan Road / Napier Road
junction as operating independently of the Govan Road / Golspie Street junction, and
therefore provides a comparative assessment of its performance with and without
development traffic.
6.6.2 The results of the assessment for the Govan Road / Napier Road priority junction are
presented in Table 6.5.
p 144 p 145
B13
Table 6.5 : Govan Road / Napier Road Junction Assessment Results
7. CONCLUSIONS 7.3 Public Transport
Movement Scenario
7.3.1 The development benefits from being within 5 minutes’ walk (400m) of Govan Bus and
2018 Base 2020 Base 2020 Base + Dev 7.1 Summary Subway Station.
RFC (Q) RFC (Q) RFC (Q)
Napier Road to Govan Road East 0.04(0.0) 0.04(0.0) 0.06(0.1) 7.1.1 SYSTRA has been commissioned by Govan Housing Association to undertake a Transport
Napier Road to Govan Road West 0.02(0.0) 0.02(0.0) 0.03(0.0) 7.3.2 For residents travelling by rail, Cardonald Rail Station is a 25 minute walk to the south-west
Assessment in support of a proposed residential development with community uses located of the site, which may appeal to any residents travelling to Inverclyde. In time, the
Govan Road East to Napier Road 0.07(0.1) 0.8(0.1) 0.08(0.1)
in the Govan area of Glasgow. The community uses include the relocation of the GHA office completion of the new Bridge will allow Partick Rail and Subway Station to be accessed by
Movement Scenario and café / gym space. new residents, at an approximate 10 minute walk. development site will not significantly affect the operation of the Govan Road / Napier Street
2018 Base 2020 Base 2020 Base + Dev
7.1.2 The site is located at Water Row and currently operates as a gated showpeople site and car junction.
RFC (Q) RFC (Q) RFC (Q) 7.3.3 The site’s accessibility is supported by GGC policy guidance which rates the site location as
Napier Road to Govan Road East 0.08(0.0) 0.08(0.1) 0.09(0.1) park. The car park is used as an informal park and ride, given the proximity of Govan Bus and within a ‘High Accessibility Area’ in line with the ‘Public Transport Accessibility‘ (Dec 2015) 7.5.5 Similarly, no mitigation measures are deemed to be required at the Govan Road / Water Row
Napier Road to Govan Road West 0.16(0.2) 0.17(0.2) 0.18(0.2) Subway Station. map.
Govan Road East to Napier Road 0.03(0.0) 0.03(0.0) 0.05(0.1) and Govan Road / Pearce Street priority junctions as development traffic flows are minimal.
7.1.3 The site is allocated for housing within the ClydePlan Strategic Development Plan, July 2017, The small amount of predicted development traffic is unlikely to have a significant impact on
6.6.3 The modelling results show that even with the addition of development traffic the junction which supports GHA’s interests for development. Govan has been subject to a number of 7.4 Development Layout and Operation the existing low vehicle flows.
is predicted to operate well within capacity during the weekday AM and PM peak periods in successful regeneration schemes in recent years, the development of this site will connect
2020 and therefore any future assessment should not be anticipated. 7.4.1 The development will be served by 3 vehicular access points from Govan Road via Pearce 7.6 Framework Travel Plan
Govan Road to the Clyde, enhancing the area for new and existing residents.
Street, Peace Lane and Napier Road. As the site is a gap site which is an end-destination, the
6.6.4 In reality the operation of the junction is dependent upon the adjacent Govan Road / Golspie 7.1.4 Recent modifications to the site layout have amended the no. of units from 253 to 200. In current road infrastructures will be extended into the development. A Framework Travel Plan is provided within this Transport Assessment and sets out the
Street signalised junction. order to retain flexibility for the developer, should future site investigations determine that guidelines for a full, future Travel Plan. The development could be supported by a Travel
7.4.2 The development layout will be designed in accordance with Designing Streets Principles and Plan which would be prepared once the development is near completion in order to be
upwards of 200 units can be delivered, the analysis has been based on the initial 253 units.
6.6.5 Traffic exiting Napier Road and turning left onto Govan Road can only do so freely when the Glasgow City Council’s ‘Design Guide for New Residential Areas’. With a permeable network implemented to new residents and encourage sustainable travel habits from the outset.
eastbound traffic lights are on green. If traffic is queued on Govan Road, then yellow box 7.1.5 This provides a robust assessment and a worst case scenario for the trip generation and of streets and spaces creating ease of movement for pedestrians and cyclists.
markings are present which will facilitate both left and right turn movements out of Napier traffic impact assessments. In reality, the people and vehicle trips associated with the 7.7 Conclusions
Road, as well as the right-turn into Napier Road from Govan Road east. 7.4.3 The site is proposed to include 136 car parking spaces. This is below the required GCC
development will be lower than those stated in this TA.
provision but given SYSTRAS detailed analysis on the matter, existing precedent in the local
7.7.1 This Transport Assessment has undertaken a comprehensive assessment of the local
6.6.6 Given the small uplift in traffic as a result of the development, it is felt that modelling the area for recent residential development will reduced car parking, the low car ownership of
Govan Road / Golspie Street / Napier Road small network would be disproportionate to the
7.2 Walking and Cycling Govan residents and high use of public transport derived by the mode split analysis there is
transport infrastructure to ensure that the proposed development can be integrated into the
surrounding transport network. Sustainable development principles have been adopted in
scale of the development, as evidenced by the threshold assessment which suggests a a very good case for accepting this reduction in car parking spaces.
7.2.1 The site is in an excellent location to take advantage of the well-connected network of the preparation of the people trip assessment.
maximum 3.4% average impact in the PM peak hour. existing local footways and paths in the surrounding area. Connections can be made to local
amenities and key destinations such as QEUH, Glasgow City Centre, Southside and the West 7.5 Traffic Impact 7.7.2 The principal aim is to ensure that accessibility to the site by foot, by cycle and by public
6.7 Summary of Traffic Impact Assessment End. The development will maximise the potential trips on foot by: transport is maximised and that any trips by car can be accommodated by the existing road
7.5.1 SYSTRA has analysed the traffic impact of the proposed development. The development will network without detriment to existing users.
6.7.1 In terms of the proposed development access junctions, junction analysis indicates that the  Providing pedestrian access points to the north (via the new bridge), south, east generate a number of people trips and a proportion of the trips will be made by car. The
Govan Road / Napier Road junction is predicted to operate within capacity during both the and west of the site. This is via The Govan Riverside Way, Napier Road, Wanlock Datashine Scotland Commute tool has been analysed to work out the mode share 7.7.3 SYSTRA concludes that the development of the Water Row site will have a positive impact on
weekday AM and PM peak periods. Street, Pearce Lane and Water Row, respectively. characteristics of the Govan area and this has been applied to the trip generation which has the ongoing regeneration of the Govan area. The development is ideally positioned to take
 Providing a clear network of footways through the development and ensuring been derived from TRICS. advantage of the nearby high frequency public transport which will minimise the desire to
6.7.2 A small amount of traffic will also access the development at Water Row and Pearce Street. travel by private car.
connections to public transport via Govan Road are clearly signposted and
These minor streets form a cul-de-sac, and are likely to have very low existing traffic flows. 7.5.2 The data revealed that 70% of residents in Govan travel by sustainable modes, promoting a
promoted.
The addition of a small amount of development traffic is not expected to significantly affect low mode share by car. 7.7.4 The introduction of the Govan – Partick Bridge will provide a destination to the north for the
the operation of the Govan Road / Water Row and Govan Road / Pearce Street priority  Vehicle speeds will be minimised throughout the development to a maximum of new residents and existing residents in Govan. This through flow of pedestrians and cyclists
junctions. 20mph. This is supported by the fact that the site is not a thoroughfare so vehicle 7.5.3 The people trip assessment indicates that the proposed development will generate 139 and will further connect Water Row to Govan, re-connecting Govan to the north bank of the River
speeds are expected to be much lower than 20mph; and 171 two-way people trips during the weekday AM and PM peak periods respectively. Of these as well as providing high quality residential and community space.
6.7.3 No mitigation measures are therefore deemed to be required. people trips, 42 and 51 will be attributed to two-way vehicle trips during the respective peak
 Within the adjacent local area there are a number of core paths and cycle paths periods. 7.7.5 The analysis has demonstrated that as the site is in a highly accessible location, and given the
that the end-users of the development can connect to. The new bridge which will
low car ownership profile of the Govan area vehicle trips associated with the site will be very
connect Govan to Partick will greatly improve the connections the north of the 7.5.4 Traffic Data was collected to assess the impact of the development on the existing local road low and can therefore be accommodated into the local road network with a relatively minor
River. network. Junctions 8 has been used to model the Govan Road / Napier Street junction. The impact and without disruption to the existing local road network.
modelling results demonstrate that the low number of vehicle trips generated with the
p 146 p 147
B13
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
Water Row, Govan Page 1 TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705 Water Row, Govan Page 2
SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-700705-180710-0703
TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories
Land Use : 03 - RESIDENTIAL consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village,
Category : C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category.
MULTI-MODAL VEHICLES
A. TRICS OUTPUTS Secondary Filtering selection:
Selected regions and areas:
03 SOUTH WEST TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
DC DORSET 1 days Use Class:
Water Row, Govan Page 3
04 EAST ANGLIA C3 20 days
SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705
CA CAMBRIDGESHIRE 2 days
NF NORFOLK 1 days This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
SF SUFFOLK 2 days has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®.
05 EAST MIDLANDS 1 CA-03-C-02 BLOCK OF FLATS CAMBRIDGESHIRE
DS DERBYSHIRE 1 days Population within 1 mile:
WESTFIELD ROAD
NT NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 2 days 1,001 to 5,000 3 days
NETHERTON
07 YORKSHIRE & NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE 10,001 to 15,000 7 days
PETERBOROUGH
RI EAST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE 1 days 15,001 to 20,000 2 days
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre)
08 NORTH WEST 20,001 to 25,000 2 days
No Sub Category
GM GREATER MANCHESTER 2 days 25,001 to 50,000 7 days
Total Number of dwellings: 44
09 NORTH Survey date: TUESDAY 18/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL
CB CUMBRIA 3 days This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
2 CA-03-C-03 BLOCKS OF FLATS CAMBRIDGESHIRE
TV TEES VALLEY 1 days CROMWELL ROAD
10 WALES Population within 5 miles:
DB DENBIGHSHIRE 1 days 5,001 to 25,000 1 days
CAMBRIDGE
11 SCOTLAND 25,001 to 50,000 1 days
EB CITY OF EDINBURGH 1 days 50,001 to 75,000 7 days
No Sub Category
SA SOUTH AYRSHIRE 1 days 75,001 to 100,000 3 days
SR STIRLING 2 days 125,001 to 250,000 2 days
Survey date: MONDAY 18/09/17 Survey Type: MANUAL
250,001 to 500,000 5 days
3 CB-03-C-01 BLOCK OF FLATS CUMBRIA
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set 500,001 or More 2 days
KING STREET
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
CARLISLE
Secondary Filtering selection: Town Centre
Car ownership within 5 miles:
Built-Up Zone
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range 0.6 to 1.0 7 days
are included in the trip rate calculation. 1.1 to 1.5 14 days
Survey date: THURSDAY 12/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
4 CB-03-C-02 BLOCK OF FLATS CUMBRIA
Parameter: Number of dwellings This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling,
BRIDGE LANE
Actual Range: 14 to 154 (units: ) within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Range Selected by User: 8 to 300 (units: ) PENRITH
Edge of Town
Public Transport Provision: Travel Plan:
No Sub Category
Selection by: Include all surveys No 21 days
Survey date: WEDNESDAY 11/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
Date Range: 01/01/10 to 18/09/17 This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place,
5 CB-03-C-03 FLATS & BUNGALOWS CUMBRIA
and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
LOUND STREET
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are
included in the trip rate calculation. PTAL Rating:
KENDAL
No PTAL Present 21 days
Selected survey days: Residential Zone
Monday 2 days This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings.
Tuesday 5 days Survey date: MONDAY 09/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
Wednesday 6 days 6 DB-03-C-01 FLATS IN HOUSES DENBIGHSHIRE
Thursday 4 days RHYL ROAD
Friday 3 days
Saturday 1 days RHUDDLAN
Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre)
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week. Residential Zone
Selected survey types: Survey date: FRIDAY 07/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL
Manual count 21 days 7 DC-03-C-02 FLATS IN BLOCKS DORSET
Directional ATC Count 0 days PALM COURT
SPA ROAD
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding WEYMOUTH
up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre)
are undertaking using machines. Residential Zone
Selected Locations: Survey date: FRIDAY 28/03/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
Town Centre 3 8 DS-03-C-02 FLATS DERBYSHIRE
Edge of Town Centre 5 BURTON ROAD
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 10 NEW NORMANTON
Edge of Town 2 DERBY
Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) 1 Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre)
Residential Zone
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories Total Number of dwellings: 28
consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Survey date: SATURDAY 09/07/11 Survey Type: MANUAL
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Not Known.
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 40/45 Selected Location Sub Categories:
Residential Zone 10
Built-Up Zone 5
No Sub Category 6
p 148 p 149
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place
Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 4
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 5
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 6
Licence No: 700705 B13
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters (Cont.) LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters (Cont.) TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED
MULTI-MODAL VEHICLES
9 EB-03-C-01 BLOCKS OF FLATS CITY OF EDINBURGH 17 SF-03-C-01 BLOCKS OF FLATS SUFFOLK Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS
MYRESIDE ROAD STATION HILL BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
CRAIGLOCKHART
EDINBURGH BURY ST EDMUNDS ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Edge of Town Centre No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip
Residential Zone Built-Up Zone Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
Total Number of dwellings: 32 Total Number of dwellings: 85 00:00 - 01:00 Water Row, Govan Page 7
Survey date: TUESDAY 26/05/15 Survey Type: MANUAL Survey date: THURSDAY 18/12/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 01:00 - 02:00 SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705
10 GM-03-C-02 BLOCK OF FLATS GREATER MANCHESTER 18 SF-03-C-03 BLOCKS OF FLATS SUFFOLK 02:00 - 03:00
WHITWORTH STREET W. TOLLGATE LANE 03:00 - 04:00
04:00 - 05:00 The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published
MA N C H E S T E R BURY ST EDMUNDS 05:00 - 06:00 by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published
Town Centre Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 06:00 - 07:00 work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the
Built-Up Zone Residential Zone 07:00 - 08:00 21 54 0.050 21 54 0.114 21 54 0.164 data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights
Total Number of dwellings: 154 Total Number of dwellings: 30 08:00 - 09:00 21 54 0.052 21 54 0.172 21 54 0.224 and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
Survey date: THURSDAY 13/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL Survey date: WEDNESDAY 03/12/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 09:00 - 10:00 21 54 0.070 21 54 0.096 21 54 0.166
11 GM-03-C-03 BLOCK OF FLATS GREATER MANCHESTER 19 SR-03-C-01 FLATS STIRLING 10:00 - 11:00 21 54 0.066 21 54 0.076 21 54 0.142 The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database.
FAIRFIELD STREET FORTHSIDE WAY 11:00 - 12:00 21 54 0.072 21 54 0.078 21 54 0.150 [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
12:00 - 13:00 21 54 0.083 21 54 0.059 21 54 0.142
MANCHESTER STIRLING 13:00 - 14:00 21 54 0.068 21 54 0.095 21 54 0.163
Town Centre Edge of Town Centre 14:00 - 15:00 21 54 0.085 21 54 0.092 21 54 0.177 Parameter summary
Built-Up Zone No Sub Category 15:00 - 16:00 21 54 0.094 21 54 0.062 21 54 0.156
Total Number of dwellings: 20 Total Number of dwellings: 80 16:00 - 17:00 21 54 0.107 21 54 0.076 21 54 0.183 Trip rate parameter range selected: 14 - 154 (units: )
Survey date: FRIDAY 14/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL Survey date: WEDNESDAY 18/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 17:00 - 18:00 21 54 0.179 21 54 0.090 21 54 0.269 Survey date date range: 01/01/10 - 18/09/17
12 NF-03-C-01 BLOCKS OF FLATS NORFOLK 20 SR-03-C-02 FLATS STIRLING 18:00 - 19:00 21 54 0.119 21 54 0.090 21 54 0.209 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 20
PAGE STAIR LANE ROSEBERRY TERRACE 19:00 - 20:00 Number of Saturdays: 1
20:00 - 21:00 Number of Sundays: 0
KING'S LYNN STIRLING 21:00 - 22:00 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0
Edge of Town Centre Edge of Town Centre 22:00 - 23:00 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
Built-Up Zone Residential Zone 23:00 - 24:00
Total Number of dwellings: 51 Total Number of dwellings: 48 Total Rates: 1.045 1.100 2.145 This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate
Survey date: THURSDAY 11/12/14 Survey Type: MANUAL Survey date: WEDNESDAY 18/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum
13 NT-03-C-01 HOUSES (SPLIT INTO FLATS) NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 21 TV-03-C-02 FLATS TEES VALLEY This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of
LAWRENCE WAY ACKLAM ROAD above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of
LINTHORPE plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days the standard filtering procedure are displayed.
NOTTINGHAM MIDDLESBROUGH where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the
No Sub Category Residential Zone foot of the table.
Total Number of dwellings: 56 Total Number of dwellings: 85
Survey date: TUESDAY 08/11/16 Survey Type: MANUAL Survey date: WEDNESDAY 29/06/11 Survey Type: MANUAL To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days
14 NT-03-C-02 HOUSES (SPLIT INTO FLATS) NOTTINGHAMSHIRE that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals
CASTLE MARINA ROAD This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated
unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated
NOTTINGHAM week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count. calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip
Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
No Sub Category
Survey date: WEDNESDAY 09/11/16 Survey Type: MANUAL
15 RI-03-C-01 FLATS EAST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE
465 PRIORY ROAD
HULL
Edge of Town
Residential Zone
Survey date: TUESDAY 13/05/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
16 SA-03-C-01 BLOCK OF FLATS SOUTH AYRSHIRE
RACECOURSE ROAD
AYR
Edge of Town Centre
Residential Zone
Survey date: TUESDAY 16/09/14 Survey Type: MANUAL
p 150 p 151
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 8
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 9
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 10
TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED
MULTI-MODAL CYCLISTS The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published MULTI-MODAL PEDESTRIANS
Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS
BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon. ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS
No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip
Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
00:00 - 01:00 [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.] 00:00 - 01:00 Water Row, Govan Page 11
01:00 - 02:00 01:00 - 02:00 SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705
02:00 - 03:00 02:00 - 03:00
03:00 - 04:00 Parameter summary 03:00 - 04:00
04:00 - 05:00 04:00 - 05:00 The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published
05:00 - 06:00 Trip rate parameter range selected: 14 - 154 (units: ) 05:00 - 06:00 by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published
06:00 - 07:00 Survey date date range: 01/01/10 - 18/09/17 06:00 - 07:00 work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the
07:00 - 08:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.009 21 54 0.013 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 20 07:00 - 08:00 21 54 0.011 21 54 0.062 21 54 0.073 data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights
08:00 - 09:00 21 54 0.003 21 54 0.011 21 54 0.014 Number of Saturdays: 1 08:00 - 09:00 21 54 0.025 21 54 0.133 21 54 0.158 and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
09:00 - 10:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.009 Number of Sundays: 0 09:00 - 10:00 21 54 0.035 21 54 0.104 21 54 0.139
10:00 - 11:00 21 54 0.001 21 54 0.003 21 54 0.004 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0 10:00 - 11:00 21 54 0.049 21 54 0.054 21 54 0.103 The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database.
11:00 - 12:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.008 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0 11:00 - 12:00 21 54 0.059 21 54 0.059 21 54 0.118 [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
12:00 - 13:00 21 54 0.003 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.007 12:00 - 13:00 21 54 0.068 21 54 0.069 21 54 0.137
13:00 - 14:00 21 54 0.000 21 54 0.002 21 54 0.002 This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate 13:00 - 14:00 21 54 0.067 21 54 0.063 21 54 0.130
14:00 - 15:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.002 21 54 0.006 calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum 14:00 - 15:00 21 54 0.075 21 54 0.067 21 54 0.142 Parameter summary
15:00 - 16:00 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.009 survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of 15:00 - 16:00 21 54 0.090 21 54 0.063 21 54 0.153
16:00 - 17:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.002 21 54 0.006 surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of 16:00 - 17:00 21 54 0.117 21 54 0.091 21 54 0.208 Trip rate parameter range selected: 14 - 154 (units: )
17:00 - 18:00 21 54 0.008 21 54 0.002 21 54 0.010 the standard filtering procedure are displayed. 17:00 - 18:00 21 54 0.155 21 54 0.070 21 54 0.225 Survey date date range: 01/01/10 - 18/09/17
18:00 - 19:00 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.001 21 54 0.006 18:00 - 19:00 21 54 0.095 21 54 0.034 21 54 0.129 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 20
19:00 - 20:00 19:00 - 20:00 Number of Saturdays: 1
20:00 - 21:00 20:00 - 21:00 Number of Sundays: 0
21:00 - 22:00 21:00 - 22:00 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0
22:00 - 23:00 22:00 - 23:00 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
23:00 - 24:00 23:00 - 24:00
Total Rates: 0.045 0.049 0.094 Total Rates: 0.846 0.869 1.715 This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate
calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of
above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of
plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days the standard filtering procedure are displayed.
where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per
time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the
foot of the table. foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days
that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals
(whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated
time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated
calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip
rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places. rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
p 152 p 153
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED

Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 12
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 13
Licence No: 700705
TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22
Water Row, Govan
Edinburgh
Tuesday 10/07/18
Page 14
TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/C - FLATS PRIVATELY OWNED
MULTI-MODAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published MULTI-MODAL TOTAL PEOPLE
Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS
BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon. ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS
No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip
Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate TRICS 7.5.1 290318 B18.22 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 10/07/18
00:00 - 01:00 [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.] 00:00 - 01:00 Water Row, Govan Page 15
01:00 - 02:00 01:00 - 02:00 SYSTRA Ltd 37 Manor Place Edinburgh Licence No: 700705
02:00 - 03:00 02:00 - 03:00
03:00 - 04:00 Parameter summary 03:00 - 04:00
04:00 - 05:00 04:00 - 05:00 The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published
05:00 - 06:00 Trip rate parameter range selected: 14 - 154 (units: ) 05:00 - 06:00 by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published
06:00 - 07:00 Survey date date range: 01/01/10 - 18/09/17 06:00 - 07:00 work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the
07:00 - 08:00 21 54 0.002 21 54 0.050 21 54 0.052 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 20 07:00 - 08:00 21 54 0.075 21 54 0.257 21 54 0.332 data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights
08:00 - 09:00 21 54 0.003 21 54 0.081 21 54 0.084 Number of Saturdays: 1 08:00 - 09:00 21 54 0.095 21 54 0.454 21 54 0.549 and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
09:00 - 10:00 21 54 0.004 21 54 0.025 21 54 0.029 Number of Sundays: 0 09:00 - 10:00 21 54 0.142 21 54 0.257 21 54 0.399
10:00 - 11:00 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.017 21 54 0.022 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0 10:00 - 11:00 21 54 0.138 21 54 0.172 21 54 0.310 The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database.
11:00 - 12:00 21 54 0.015 21 54 0.014 21 54 0.029 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0 11:00 - 12:00 21 54 0.173 21 54 0.184 21 54 0.357 [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
12:00 - 13:00 21 54 0.008 21 54 0.018 21 54 0.026 12:00 - 13:00 21 54 0.181 21 54 0.172 21 54 0.353
13:00 - 14:00 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.011 21 54 0.016 This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate 13:00 - 14:00 21 54 0.158 21 54 0.193 21 54 0.351
14:00 - 15:00 21 54 0.010 21 54 0.011 21 54 0.021 calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum 14:00 - 15:00 21 54 0.193 21 54 0.206 21 54 0.399 Parameter summary
15:00 - 16:00 21 54 0.032 21 54 0.010 21 54 0.042 survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of 15:00 - 16:00 21 54 0.259 21 54 0.168 21 54 0.427
16:00 - 17:00 21 54 0.032 21 54 0.008 21 54 0.040 surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of 16:00 - 17:00 21 54 0.291 21 54 0.199 21 54 0.490 Trip rate parameter range selected: 14 - 154 (units: )
17:00 - 18:00 21 54 0.083 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.088 the standard filtering procedure are displayed. 17:00 - 18:00 21 54 0.475 21 54 0.201 21 54 0.676 Survey date date range: 01/01/10 - 18/09/17
18:00 - 19:00 21 54 0.038 21 54 0.005 21 54 0.043 18:00 - 19:00 21 54 0.292 21 54 0.170 21 54 0.462 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 20
19:00 - 20:00 19:00 - 20:00 Number of Saturdays: 1
20:00 - 21:00 20:00 - 21:00 Number of Sundays: 0
21:00 - 22:00 21:00 - 22:00 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0
22:00 - 23:00 22:00 - 23:00 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
23:00 - 24:00 23:00 - 24:00
Total Rates: 0.237 0.255 0.492 Total Rates: 2.472 2.633 5.105 This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate
calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of
above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of
plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days the standard filtering procedure are displayed.
where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per
time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the
foot of the table. foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days
that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals
(whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated
time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated
calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip
rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places. rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
p 154 p 155
B13
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT A

B
20/6/18
3/7/18
ML

House 2 1B 2P 8 House 9 House 1
(double height) (over 2 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)
Shingle
masonry d
SM
Sl
op
ing
ha
nW denotes
Go
st
Workspace st
Po
23 27
B2 21
32 Block B
Block A 17
15
31
11
C2 C4 C1
WATER ROW
E
AC Total
RR
5 TE
d ER
Ol NA
PI
va
n
rch
Flats 159
Go hu
hC Block D
P a ris 20 17 27 Terrace T/H 41
Total units 200
E1 Block F Commercial 3500sqm
m 45
6.3
Block C 2
KEY
C2 E3 Pla
y Ar
ea
Ground Floor
00
59
66
WATER ROW
NA
Block E E2
PI
ER
17
RO
PEARCE LANE
G2 NOTES -
AD

10
9
21
5
17
PEARCE STREET
an
ery Gov
Su
rg New
rch
1
C h u
9
CLIENT -
te
rce Institu
796
nk
PROJECT -
892 Pea Ba Water Row Masterplan
820
816 DRAWING -
830
786
840 to 86
0 794
790 Ba
nk G1 Sketch Layout - Ground Floor

784
Block G May 2018 ML 1:500@A0 / 1:1250@A3
m
ml 6.0 JOB NO - CHKD - DRWG NO -
Me
ar 20122 JB (SK)007-1
W m
6.1
er
elt
Sh
m
e 779 5.5
atu 787
00 St
58
66 801
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow 803

811
TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888
13
7 to
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 PH 24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ
819
21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270
ET 15 to
RE
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 41/45 ST EMAIL INFO@COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK
23 20 WWW.COLLECTIVEARCHITECTURE.CO.UK
25
29
55
H
00
G
EI
RL
BU
p 156 p 157
B13
C. FRAMEWORK TRAVEL PLAN 1.1.7 Indicators
1. FRAMEWORK TRAVEL PLAN 1.1.8 The following indicators could be used to monitor progress towards meeting future TP
1.1.1 The objective of this Framework Travel Plan (FTP) is to demonstrate a Travel Plan (TP) targets (if mode share targets are considered appropriate):
strategy for the residential element of the proposed Water Row development. It sets out  The mode share(s) which can be established from yearly travel surveys. These
the measures which could be adopted and implemented. A key consideration of the FTP surveys will identify the anticipated yearly mode share shift towards sustainable
is the desire to maximise sustainable travel to / from the site of the proposed transport;
1.5 Marketing and Travel Information
development.
 Personalised travel planning sessions with the travel plan co-ordinator will identify 1.5.1 Marketing and awareness raising form an important part of the TP. This involves engaging
any barriers effecting sustainable transport usage; and with individuals about the TPC and raising awareness of travel options and the benefits of
1.2 Travel Plan Benefits sustainable and active travel.
 General interest and awareness of TP posters, leaflets etc.
1.2.1 A TP is a management tool designed to encourage people to rethink their travel choices 1.5.2 The TPC will market and promote the TP to all users of the site as follows:
and requirements in order to minimise the adverse impacts of a development on the 1.2 Travel Plan Strategy
environment. This is achieved by setting out a strategy for eliminating barriers preventing  Producing dedicated Travel Options Leaflets which can be personalised to suit the
users of the site from using sustainable travel modes and managing single occupancy car 1.2.1 This section of the FTP outlines the management and marketing strategy of the TP, individual needs of the development. Different leaflets will be required for the
use. detailing who will take responsibility for the TP and how it will be promoted to residents. residential element from the leaflets produced for the town centre;
 Organising events to coincide with Bike Week, European Mobility Week and any
1.2.2 If designed well, the implementation of a TP can lead to economic, environmental, social 1.3 Travel Plan Co-ordinator other national / local events; and
and health benefits. It will lead to a reduction in car trips associated with the development
and an increase in the proportion of residents travelling by sustainable modes, including 1.3.1 A TPC could be appointed to manage the residential TP. This person would be allocated  Displaying regular updates on TP targets.
walking, cycling and public transport. A TP can also assist in increasing accessibility whilst time within their role to undertake TPC duties and will provide a point of contact for travel
reducing congestion, local air pollution, greenhouse gases and noise. 1.5.3 A Travel Options Leaflet can encompass the vast majority of the measures recommended
information and ideas.
in this chapter and should be made available in hard and electronic formats.
1.1 Travel Plan Aims, Objectives and Targets 1.3.2 The remit of the TPC could include the following:
1.5.4 Regular events can raise the awareness of facilities on site and challenges users to try an
 Co-ordinate and issue travel surveys and carry out analysis of the results; alternative for the day and will provide an opportunity to continue to raise the awareness
1.1.1 The sections below describe the overarching objectives and targets for the TP. Included
Implement the measures recommended within this chapter based upon the results of the TP. Events such as Bike Week provide a focus for promoting sustainable travel.
are indicators through which progress towards meeting targets should be assessed. 
of the travel survey;
1.1.2 Aims and Objectives 1.6 Walking and Cycling
 Liaise with key stakeholders and ensure that developers are aware of their
1.1.3 The overall aim of the TP is to minimise the proportion of single occupancy vehicle trips. commitment to encouraging sustainable travel; 1.6.1 Active travel is cheap, offers reliable journey times and is environmentally friendly.
This includes commuter based trips as well as leisure trips.  Promote the social, economic and environmental benefits of sustainable travel, Walking and cycling can also lead to health benefits. Measures to encourage walking and
including journey sharing; cycling include:
1.1.4 The objectives can be summarised as:
 Provide sustainable travel information including available public transport services  Provision of walking information giving directions, times and maps;
 To improve the travel options for residents; operating within and around Govan, walking and cycling maps;  Provision of cycling maps, routes and cycle times, promotion of the new Bridge; and
 To improve the awareness of the available sustainable travel modes;  Establish and co-ordinate links with public transport operators in order to maintain  Provision of pedestrian and cycle access points to the development and dedicated
 To minimise the incentives for private car usage; up-to-date information to improve access to the development by alternative crossing facilities.
modes; and
 To promote health, social and economic benefits of sustainable travel; and
1.6.2 Maps, routes and travel information mentioned above should be tailored to the Water
 Monitor and report on the TP to senior management and Glasgow City Council.
 To manage car use. Row development.
1.1.5 Targets and Indicators 1.4 Potential Measures to be Implemented

1.7 Public Transport
1.1.6 Targets are the specific quantitative goals based on the objectives. The mode shift targets 1.4.1 Many of the measures that could be implemented to encourage residents to travel
1.7.1 There is significant scope to encourage residents at the proposed development to use
are usually set once the initial mode share is known which can be obtained through travel sustainably can be included in a Residential Travel Pack. The travel pack would be issued
public transport, particularly for commuting purposes to Glasgow City Centre. Listed
surveys. This ensures that the targets are relevant and appropriate and can be tailored to new residents at the development and will include a variety of information on
below are potential measures to encourage residents to travel by public transport.
where necessary. Each will contribute to the overall reduction in single occupancy car trips sustainable travel including walking maps and bus timetables.
to / from the development as a whole. The progress in achieving a modal shift is  An induction pack containing information on public transport routes, timetables
monitored via further travel surveys. and prices (in relation to car travel) could be distributed to all residents;
 Provision of maps and guides of local bus networks and information on walking
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow Proposed Residential Development, Water Row, Glasgow Proposed Residential Development, Water Row, Glasgow times to interchanges; and
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 Framework Travel Plan Framework Travel Plan
 Raising the awareness of the bus and walking / cycle linkage to Govan Bus and
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 42/45 Page 1/7 Page 2/7
Subway Stations.
p 158 p 159
Proposed Residential Development, Water Row, Glasgow
Framework Travel Plan
B13
Figure A1
2018 Surveyed AM 0830 - 0930
Govan Rd
1.8 Managing Car Use  Encourage more active lifestyles to address health and well-being issues; and D. TRAFFIC DIAGRAMS
 Promote environmentally responsible travel choices and carbon reduction by
1.8.1 Measures that could be implemented to manage single occupancy car use include:
helping reduce individual carbon footprints.
238
27
 Personalised travel planning session offered to residents which can be carried out
by the TPC;
Orkney St
 Promote car sharing (such as SPT Lifts Share); and
 Provide information in hard format regarding the financial and environmental costs
319
183
associated with driving.
39
156
1.9 Journey Sharing
1.9.1 Journey sharing schemes should be encouraged where possible. This includes not only
238
160
14
private car use but also walking, cycling and public transport journeys which can be
promoted to residents by the TPC.
1.10 Personalised Travel Planning
114
66
1.10.1 Personal Travel Planning (PTP) is a well-established method that encourages people to
make more sustainable travel choices. It seeks to overcome the habitual use of the car,
348
25
enabling more journeys to be made on foot, bike, public transport or in shared cars. This
is achieved through the provision of information, incentives and motivation directly to
individuals to help them make more informed travel choices. PTP forms an important part
39
2
of UK national and local transport policy, contributing to the suite of tools promoted
under the general heading of Smarter Choices.
262
21
43
Napier Rd B
1.10.2 The tools and techniques to encourage people to travel sustainably differ from project to
9
project and include:
 One-to-one conversations, either at the doorstep or by telephone, between
120
64
individuals and trained field officers to encourage and motivate a change in
behaviour;
353
61
The provision of information on how to travel sustainably (for example, maps or
Helen St

A
guides about the local bus network, walking and cycling routes); and
93
Fastlink Lane
 The offer of incentives to encourage the use of sustainable modes (for example,
85
39
39
pedometers, water bottles, free bus tickets).
1.10.3 Within the UK, Personalised Travel Planning (PTP) has been reported to generally reduce
car driver trips by 11% and the distance travelled by car by 12%. A successful PTP can
deliver:
 Reduced congestion and reduce car use;
 Individual health improvements through increased walking and cycling;
 Greater use of public transport;
 Better air quality and reduce traffic noise;
Golspie St
 More use of local services by residents;
 Support sustainable economic growth by reducing peak hour congestion;
Proposed Residential Development, Water Row, Glasgow Proposed Residential Development, Water Row, Glasgow Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow
Framework Travel Plan Framework Travel Plan Transport Assessment GB01T1D72
Page 4/7 Page 5/7 Final Report 28/08/18 Page 43/45
p 160 p 161
p 162
B
Napier Rd
16 54 43 359 347
A 360 C 44 249
Govan Rd
20 0 303 342
327 37 14 141 24 33
210
45 199
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
136
53
Golspie St 178
76
44 109
Helen St
Figure A2
2018 Surveyed PM 1630 - 1730
NRTF Low Growth (2018- 1.016

2020)
Napier Rd B
62 9 21 354 324
A 358 C 25 186
Govan Rd
44 2 242 241
266 40 14 158 39 27
163
67 115
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
86
39
Golspie St 122
65
39 94
Helen St
Figure A3
2020 AM Base 0830 - 0930
NRTF Low Growth (2018- 1.016

2020)
Napier Rd B
16 55 44 364 353
366 C 45 253
Govan Rd
20 0 307 347
332 38 14 143 24 34
213
45 202
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
138
54
Golspie St 180
77
45 111
Helen St
Figure A4
2020 PM Base 1630 - 1730
Water
Pearce St
Row Napier Rd
10% 10% 49% 7% 7% 34% 53% 32%

7% 7% 49% 29% 21%
Govan Rd
49% 34% 53% 32%
7% 7% 49% 21%
29%
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
Golspie St
29%
29%
Travelling % (by car)
West 18%
East 32% Arrivals
South East 21% Departures
South
Helen St
29%
Figure A5
Development Distribution
B13
p 163
p 164
Water
Pearce St
Row Napier Rd
1 4 17 1 2 11 18 11
1 1 10 7
Govan Rd
3 2 4 2
2 2 3 1
2
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
Golspie St
10
2
7 Arrivals
34 Departures
Helen St
Figure A6
Development AM 0830 - 0930
Water
Pearce St
Row Napier Rd
4 2 7 3 1 5 8 5
3 3 4 3
Govan Rd
18 12 19 12
1 1 18 7
11
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
Golspie St
4
11
36 Arrivals
15 Departures
Helen St
Figure A7
Development PM 1630 - 1730
Water B
Pearce St
Row Napier Rd
A c
1 4 0 0 0 17 62 12 32 372 335
359 359 358 35 193
Govan Rd
0 3 46 2 245 244
269 269 270 40 14 159 39 27
163
69 115
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
86
39
Golspie St 122
75
39 96
Helen St
Figure A8
2020 AM 0830 - 0930 Base + Com Dev + Dev
Water
Pearce St
Row Napier Rd
4 2 0 0 0 7 19 56 49 372 357
368 368 366 49 256
Govan Rd
0 18 32 0 326 359
333 333 350 38 14 151 24 34
213
56 202
Fastlink Lane
Orkney St
138
54
Golspie St 180
81
45 121
Helen St
Figure A9
2020 PM 1630 - 1730 Base + Com Dev + Dev
B13
p 165
Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541) Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
B13
File summary
Junctions 8 Title Govan Rd / Napier Rd
E. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OUTPUTS PICADY 8 - Priority Intersection Module Location Govan - Glasgow
Site Number
Version: 8.0.6.541 [19821,26/11/2015]
© Copyright TRL Limited, 2018 Date 13/07/2018
Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL: Version
Tel: +44 (0)1344 770758 email: software@trl.co.uk Web: http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk Status (new file)
The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution Identifier
Client Junction Network Options
Filename: Govan Rd_Napier Rd.arc8 Jobnumber Driving Side Lighting
Path: \\Coral\client projects\TI Proposals & Prequals\In preparation\Water Row, Govan CEF\Junction Modelling Left Normal/unknown
Enumerator team_batchfarm
Report generation date: 19/07/2018 14:24:39
Description
« (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base + Dev, AM Analysis Options Arms

» Junction Network Vehicle Length Do Queue Calculate Residual Residual Capacity Criteria RFC Average Delay Threshold Queue Threshold
» Arms (m) Variations Capacity Type Threshold (s) (PCU)
Arms
» Traffic Flows 5.75 N/A 0.85 36.00 20.00
Arm Arm Name Description Arm Type
» Entry Flows
» Turning Proportions A A Govan Rd West Major
» Vehicle Mix Units B B Napier Road Minor
» Results Distance Units Speed Units Traffic Units Input Traffic Units Results Flow Units Average Delay Units Total Delay Units Rate Of Delay Units C C Govan Rd East Major
m kph PCU PCU perHour s -Min perMin
Summary of junction performance Major Arm Geometry
(Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base + Dev, AM

Width of Has kerbed central Width of kerbed central Has right Width For Right Visibility For Right Blocking Queue
Arm Blocks?
AM carriageway (m) reserve reserve (m) turn bay Turn (m) Turn (m) (PCU)
Queue (PCU) Delay (s) RFC LOS C 7.10 0.00 ü 4.20 104.00 ü 3.00
A1 - 2020 Base + Dev Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D.
Data Errors and Warnings
Stream B-C 0.07 6.91 0.06 A No errors or warnings
Stream B-A 0.03 9.25 0.03 A Minor Arm Geometry
Stream C-AB 0.09 6.10 0.08 A
Analysis Set Details Arm
Minor
Lane
Width
Lane
Width
Lane
Width
Width at
give-way
Width at Width at Width at Width at
Estimate
Flare
Flare
Length
Visibility To Visibility To
Stream C-A - - - - Arm Type 5m (m) 10m (m) 15m (m) 20m (m) Left (m) Right (m)
Specific Network Flow Reason For (m) (Left) (m) (Right) (m) (m) Length (PCU)
Stream A-B - - - - Roundabout Include In Use Specific Network Capacity
Name Description Demand Set Locked Scaling Factor Scaling One lane
Capacity Model Report Demand Set(s) Scaling Factor (%)
(s) (%) Factors
Stream A-C - - - - B plus 10.00 4.20 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 0 0
(Default flare
N/A ü 100.000 100.000
Analysis Set)
Values shown are the maximum values over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle.
Slope / Intercept / Capacity
Demand Set Details
"D1 - 2018 0830 - 0930, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00
"D2 - 2018 1630 - 1730, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Model Model
Model
Time
Results
Single Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts
Time Traffic Time For
"D3 - 2020 Base, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00 Scenario Start Finish Segment Time Run Use
Name Period Description Profile Period Central Locked Relationship Slope Slope Slope Slope
"D4 - 2020 Base, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Name Time Time Length Segment Automatically Relationship Intercept
Name Type Length Hour
"D5 - 2020 Base + Dev, AM " model duration: 08:30 - 10:00 (HH:mm) (HH:mm)
(min)
(min)
Only
Only Junction Stream for for for for
(PCU/hr)
"D6 - 2020 Base + Dev, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 A-B A-C C-A C-B
2020
Base 2020 1 B-A 573.534 0.099 0.251 0.158 0.359
Run using Junctions 8.0.6.541 at 19/07/2018 14:24:39 ONE
+ Base + AM 08:30 10:00 90 15 ü 1 B-C 663.915 0.097 0.245 - -
HOUR
Dev, Dev
1 C-B 772.234 0.285 0.285 - -
AM
The slopes and intercepts shown above do NOT include any corrections or adjustments.
Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted.
Junction Network
Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments.
Junctions Traffic Flows

Junction Name Junction Type Major Road Direction Arm Order Do Geometric Delay Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS
1 (untitled) T-Junction Two-w a y A,B,C 6.81 A
Demand Set Data Options
PCU Estimate
Default Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Default Turning Turning Turning
Vehicle Mix Factor from
Vehicle Mix Varies Mix Varies Mix Varies Turning Proportions Proportions Proportions
Source for a HV entry/exit
Mix Over Time Over Turn Over Entry Proportions Vary Over Time Vary Over Turn Vary Over Entry
Residential Led Development, Water Row, Glasgow (PCU) counts
1 2
HV
Transport Assessment GB01T1D72 ü ü 2.00 ü ü
Percentages
Final Report 28/08/18 Page 44/45
p 166 p 167
Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541) Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541) Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
B13
Entry Flows Results Main results: (09:15-09:30)
Stream
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity
RFC
Start Queue End Queue Delay
LOS
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s)
B-C 35.23 8.81 35.23 0.00 556.07 0.063 0.07 0.07 6.911 A
General Flows Data Results Summary for whole modelled period
B-A 13.21 3.30 13.21 0.00 402.23 0.033 0.03 0.03 9.253 A
Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) Total Total Inclusive
Max Max Average Average Rate Of Inclusive Total
Max Max Junction Queueing Average C-AB 50.66 12.66 50.66 0.00 640.59 0.079 0.09 0.09 6.101 A
A ONE HOUR ü 420.00 100.000 Stream
RFC
Delay Queue
LOS
Demand
Arrivals Delay (PCU-
Queueing Queueing Delay Queueing Delay
Queueing Delay Generated on 19/07/2018 14:24:41 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
(s) (PCU) (PCU/hr)
(PCU) min)
Delay (s) (PCU-min/min) (PCU-min)
(s) C-A 297.26 74.32 297.26 0.00 - - - - - -
B ONE HOUR ü 44.00 100.000
B-C 0.06 6.91 0.07 A 29.36 44.05 4.84 6.60 0.05 4.84 6.60 A-B 68.26 17.07 68.26 0.00 - - - - - -
C ONE HOUR ü 316.00 100.000
B-A 0.03 9.25 0.03 A 11.01 16.52 2.37 8.60 0.03 2.37 8.60 A-C 394.17 98.54 394.17 0.00 - - - - - -
Queueing Delay results: (09:00-09:15)
C-AB 0.08 6.10 0.09 A 42.22 63.32 6.16 5.84 0.07 6.16 5.84
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of
Main results: (09:30-09:45)
Turning Proportions C-A - - - - 247.75 371.63 - - - - - Stream
min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service
A-B - - - - 56.89 85.34 - - - - - Stream
RFC
LOS B-C 0.99 0.07 6.910 A A
A-C - - - - 328.51 492.76 - - - - - B-A 0.49 0.03 9.253 A A
B-C 28.77 7.19 28.83 0.00 576.02 0.050 0.07 0.05 6.581 A
Turning Counts / Proportions (PCU/hr) - Junction 1 (for whole period) C-AB 1.28 0.09 6.101 A A
B-A 10.79 2.70 10.82 0.00 433.67 0.025 0.03 0.03 8.515 A
To C-A - - - - -
C-AB 41.36 10.34 41.43 0.00 664.71 0.062 0.09 0.07 5.776 A
A B C A-B - - - - -
C-A 242.72 60.68 242.72 0.00 - - - - - -
A 0.000 62.000 358.000 A-C - - - - -
From A-B 55.74 13.93 55.74 0.00 - - - - - -
B 12.000 0.000 32.000
A-C 321.83 80.46 321.83 0.00 - - - - - -
C 270.000 46.000 0.000 Queueing Delay results: (09:15-09:30)
Main Results for each time segment
Main results: (09:45-10:00) Stream
Turning Proportions (PCU) - Junction 1 (for whole period) Main results: (08:30-08:45)
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay B-C 1.01 0.07 6.911 A A
Stream RFC LOS
To Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s)
Stream
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr)
RFC
(PCU) (PCU) (s)
LOS B-A 0.51 0.03 9.253 A A
A B C B-C 24.09 6.02 24.13 0.00 590.40 0.041 0.05 0.04 6.359 A
B-C 24.09 6.02 23.92 0.00 590.44 0.041 0.00 0.04 6.353 A C-AB 1.29 0.09 6.101 A A
A 0.00 0.15 0.85 B-A 9.03 2.26 9.06 0.00 456.42 0.020 0.03 0.02 8.047 A
From B-A 9.03 2.26 8.95 0.00 456.52 0.020 0.00 0.02 8.043 A C-A - - - - -
B 0.27 0.00 0.73 C-AB 34.63 8.66 34.68 0.00 682.17 0.051 0.07 0.05 5.562 A
C-AB 34.63 8.66 34.42 0.00 682.17 0.051 0.00 0.05 5.556 A A-B - - - - -
C 0.85 0.15 0.00 C-A 203.27 50.82 203.27 0.00 - - - - - -
C-A 203.27 50.82 203.27 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
A-B 46.68 11.67 46.68 0.00 - - - - - -
A-B 46.68 11.67 46.68 0.00 - - - - - - A-C 269.52 67.38 269.52 0.00 - - - - - -
Vehicle Mix A-C 269.52 67.38 269.52 0.00 - - - - - - Queueing Delay results: (09:30-09:45)
Queueing Delay Results for each time segment Stream
Average PCU Per Vehicle - Junction 1 (for whole period) B-C 0.81 0.05 6.581 A A
Stream
RFC
LOS Queueing Delay results: (08:30-08:45) B-A 0.40 0.03 8.515 A A
To (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s)
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of C-AB 1.00 0.07 5.776 A A
A B C B-C 28.77 7.19 28.73 0.00 576.04 0.050 0.04 0.05 6.577 A Stream
B-A 10.79 2.70 10.77 0.00 433.71 0.025 0.02 0.03 8.511 A C-A - - - - -
A 1.000 1.000 1.040 B-C 0.62 0.04 6.353 A A
From C-AB 41.36 10.34 41.31 0.00 664.71 0.062 0.05 0.07 5.774 A A-B - - - - -
B 1.000 1.000 1.000 B-A 0.29 0.02 8.043 A A
C-A 242.72 60.68 242.72 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
C 1.085 1.000 1.000 C-AB 0.79 0.05 5.556 A A
A-B 55.74 13.93 55.74 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - -
A-C 321.83 80.46 321.83 0.00 - - - - - - Queueing Delay results: (09:45-10:00)
Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Junction 1 (for whole period) A-B - - - - -
To A-C - - - - - Stream
A B C B-C 0.65 0.04 6.359 A A
A 0.0 0.0 4.0 Stream
RFC
LOS Queueing Delay results: (08:45-09:00) B-A 0.31 0.02 8.047 A A
From
B 0.0 0.0 0.0 B-C 35.23 8.81 35.17 0.00 556.09 0.063 0.05 0.07 6.910 A Stream
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of C-AB 0.81 0.05 5.562 A A
C 8.5 0.0 0.0 B-A 13.21 3.30 13.18 0.00 402.25 0.033 0.03 0.03 9.253 A C-A - - - - -
B-C 0.77 0.05 6.577 A A
C-AB 50.66 12.66 50.58 0.00 640.59 0.079 0.07 0.09 6.101 A A-B - - - - -
B-A 0.37 0.02 8.511 A A
C-A 297.26 74.32 297.26 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
C-AB 0.99 0.07 5.774 A A
A-B 68.26 17.07 68.26 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - -
A-C 394.17 98.54 394.17 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - -
A-C - - - - -
4 5 6
p 168 p 169
B13
File summary Junction Network Options
Junctions 8 Title Govan Rd / Napier Rd
Driving Side Lighting
Left Normal/unknown
Location Govan - Glasgow
PICADY 8 - Priority Intersection Module
Site Number
Version: 8.0.6.541 [19821,26/11/2015]
Date 13/07/2018
Arms
© Copyright TRL Limited, 2018
For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL: Version
Tel: +44 (0)1344 770758 email: software@trl.co.uk Web: http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk Status (new file)
The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution Identifier Arms
Filename: Govan Rd_Napier Rd.arc8
Client
Jobnumber

Arm
A
Arm
A
Name
Govan Rd West
Description Arm Type
Major
Entry Flows
Path: \\Coral\client projects\TI Proposals & Prequals\In preparation\Water Row, Govan CEF\Junction Modelling
Enumerator team_batchfarm B B Napier Road Minor
Report generation date: 19/07/2018 14:26:24 General Flows Data
Description C C Govan Rd East Major
Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%)
A ONE HOUR ü 385.00 100.000

« (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base + Dev, PM Analysis Options Major Arm Geometry
B ONE HOUR ü 105.00 100.000
» Junction Network Vehicle Length Do Queue Calculate Residual Residual Capacity Criteria RFC Average Delay Threshold Queue Threshold Width of Has kerbed central Width of kerbed central Has right Width For Right Visibility For Right Blocking Queue
» Arms (m) Variations Capacity Type Threshold (s) (PCU)
Arm
carriageway (m) reserve reserve (m) turn bay Turn (m) Turn (m)
Blocks?
(PCU) C ONE HOUR ü 382.00 100.000
» Traffic Flows 5.75 N/A 0.85 36.00 20.00 C 7.10 0.00 ü 4.20 104.00 ü 3.00
» Entry Flows Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D.
» Turning Proportions
» Vehicle Mix Units Turning Proportions
» Results Distance Units Speed Units Traffic Units Input Traffic Units Results Flow Units Average Delay Units Total Delay Units Rate Of Delay Units Minor Arm Geometry
Minor
Lane Lane Lane Width at
Width at Width at Width at Width at
Estimate Flare
Visibility To Visibility To
Turning Counts / Proportions (PCU/hr) - Junction 1 (for whole period)
Arm Width Width Width give-way Flare Length
Summary of junction performance Arm Type
(m) (Left) (m) (Right) (m) (m)
5m (m) 10m (m) 15m (m) 20m (m)
Length (PCU)
Left (m) Right (m)
To
One lane A B C
PM (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base + Dev, PM B plus
flare
10.00 4.20 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 0 0
From
A 0.000 19.000 366.000
Queue (PCU) Delay (s) RFC LOS B 56.000 0.000 49.000
A1 - 2020 Base + Dev Data Errors and Warnings C 350.000 32.000 0.000
Slope / Intercept / Capacity
Stream B-C 0.10 6.54 0.09 A No errors or warnings
Stream B-A 0.21 12.44 0.18 B Turning Proportions (PCU) - Junction 1 (for whole period)
Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts
Stream C-AB 0.06 5.84 0.05 A
Analysis Set Details Slope Slope Slope Slope
To
Stream C-A - - - - Intercept
Specific Network Flow Reason For Junction Stream for for for for A B C
Stream A-B - - - - Roundabout Include In Use Specific Network Capacity (PCU/hr)
Name
Capacity Model
Description
Report Demand Set(s)
Demand Set Locked Scaling Factor
Scaling Factor (%)
Scaling A-B A-C C-A C-B A 0.00 0.05 0.95
(s) (%) Factors From
Stream A-C - - - - 1 B-A 508.470 0.088 0.223 0.140 0.318
(Default B 0.53 0.00 0.47
N/A ü 100.000 100.000 1 B-C 748.870 0.109 0.276 - -
Analysis Set) C 0.92 0.08 0.00
1 C-B 772.234 0.285 0.285 - -
Values shown are the maximum values over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle.
Demand Set Details
"D2 - 2018 1630 - 1730, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Time Traffic
Model Model
Model
Time
Time
Results
For
Single
Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments.
Vehicle Mix
"D3 - 2020 Base, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00 Scenario Start Finish Segment Time Run Use
Name Period Description Profile Period Central Locked Relationship
"D4 - 2020 Base, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Name Time Time Length Segment Automatically Relationship
"D5 - 2020 Base + Dev, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00 (HH:mm) (HH:mm)
(min)
(min)
Only
Only Average PCU Per Vehicle - Junction 1 (for whole period)
Traffic Flows
"D6 - 2020 Base + Dev, PM " model duration: 17:30 - 19:00
2020 To
Base 2020
ONE A B C
Run using Junctions 8.0.6.541 at 19/07/2018 14:26:23 + Base + PM 17:30 19:00 90 15
HOUR ü
Dev, Dev A 1.000 1.000 1.014
PM Demand Set Data Options From
B 1.000 1.000 1.000
PCU Estimate C 1.051 1.000 1.000
Vehicle Mix Varies Mix Varies Mix Varies Turning Proportions Proportions Proportions
Junction Network
(PCU) counts
Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Junction 1 (for whole period)
HV
ü ü 2.00 ü ü
Percentages To
Junctions A B C

A 0.0 0.0 1.4
Junction Name Junction Type Major Road Direction Arm Order Do Geometric Delay Junction Delay (s) Junction LOS From
1 (untitled) T-Junction Two-w a y A,B,C 8.79 A B 0.0 0.0 0.0
C 5.1 0.0 0.0
1 2 3
p 170 p 171
B13
Results Main results: (18:15-18:30)
Stream
RFC
LOS
Stream
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s) min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service
B-C 53.95 13.49 53.95 0.00 603.92 0.089 0.10 0.10 6.545 A B-C 1.43 0.10 6.543 A A
Results Summary for whole modelled period
B-A 61.66 15.41 61.65 0.00 351.03 0.176 0.21 0.21 12.439 B B-A 3.04 0.20 12.419 B B
Total Total Inclusive
Max Max Junction Queueing Average C-AB 35.24 8.81 35.24 0.00 651.51 0.054 0.06 0.06 5.840 A C-AB 0.85 0.06 5.840 A A
Stream Delay Queue Demand Queueing Queueing Delay Queueing Delay Generated on 19/07/2018 14:22:43 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
RFC LOS Arrivals Delay (PCU- Queueing Delay
(s) (PCU) (PCU/hr)
(PCU) min)
(s) C-A 385.35 96.34 385.35 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - -
B-C 0.09 6.54 0.10 A 44.96 67.44 6.93 6.17 0.08 6.93 6.17 A-B 20.92 5.23 20.92 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - -
B-A 0.18 12.44 0.21 B 51.39 77.08 14.30 11.13 0.16 14.30 11.13 A-C 402.97 100.74 402.97 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
C-AB 0.05 5.84 0.06 A 29.37 44.05 4.13 5.63 0.05 4.13 5.63
C-A - - - - 321.16 481.75 - - - - - Main results: (18:30-18:45) Queueing Delay results: (18:15-18:30) Junctions 8
A-B - - - - 17.43 26.15 - - - - - Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of
Stream
RFC
(PCU) (PCU) (s)
LOS Stream
min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service PICADY 8 - Priority Intersection Module
A-C - - - - 335.85 503.77 - - - - -
B-C 44.05 11.01 44.14 0.00 632.61 0.070 0.10 0.08 6.120 A B-C 1.46 0.10 6.545 A A Version: 8.0.6.541 [19821,26/11/2015]
B-A 50.34 12.59 50.57 0.00 380.05 0.132 0.21 0.15 10.933 B B-A 3.16 0.21 12.439 B B © Copyright TRL Limited, 2018
C-AB 28.77 7.19 28.82 0.00 673.65 0.043 0.06 0.04 5.584 A C-AB 0.86 0.06 5.840 A A For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL:
Tel: +44 (0)1344 770758 email: software@trl.co.uk Web: http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk
C-A 314.64 78.66 314.64 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - -
The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution
A-B 17.08 4.27 17.08 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - -
A-C 329.03 82.26 329.03 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - - Filename: Govan Rd_Napier Rd.arc8
Main Results for each time segment Path: \\Coral\client projects\TI Proposals & Prequals\In preparation\Water Row, Govan CEF\Junction Modelling
Main results: (18:45-19:00) Queueing Delay results: (18:30-18:45) Report generation date: 19/07/2018 14:22:41
Main results: (17:30-17:45) Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of
Stream RFC LOS Stream
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s) min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service
Stream RFC LOS
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s) B-C 36.89 9.22 36.95 0.00 652.56 0.057 0.08 0.06 5.850 A B-C 1.15 0.08 6.120 A A « (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base, AM
B-C 36.89 9.22 36.65 0.00 652.85 0.057 0.00 0.06 5.842 A B-A 42.16 10.54 42.30 0.00 400.99 0.105 0.15 0.12 10.040 B B-A 2.40 0.16 10.933 B B » Junction Network
B-A 42.16 10.54 41.70 0.00 401.05 0.105 0.00 0.12 10.004 A C-AB 24.09 6.02 24.13 0.00 689.67 0.035 0.04 0.04 5.410 A C-AB 0.67 0.04 5.584 A A » Arms
C-AB 24.09 6.02 23.95 0.00 689.67 0.035 0.00 0.04 5.406 A C-A 263.50 65.87 263.50 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - - » Traffic Flows
C-A 263.50 65.87 263.50 0.00 - - - - - - » Entry Flows
A-B 14.30 3.58 14.30 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - -
A-B 14.30 3.58 14.30 0.00 - - - - - - » Turning Proportions
A-C 275.54 68.89 275.54 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
» Vehicle Mix
A-C 275.54 68.89 275.54 0.00 - - - - - -
» Results
Queueing Delay Results for each time segment Queueing Delay results: (18:45-19:00)
Stream
Queueing Total Delay (PCU-
min)
Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU-
min/min)
Average Delay Per Arriving
Vehicle (s)
Unsignalised Level Of
Service
Signalised Level Of
Service
Summary of junction performance
Stream
RFC
LOS Queueing Delay results: (17:30-17:45)
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s) B-C 0.92 0.06 5.850 A A
B-C 44.05 11.01 43.99 0.00 632.81 0.070 0.06 0.07 6.113 A Stream
min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service B-A 1.83 0.12 10.040 B B AM
B-A 50.34 12.59 50.20 0.00 380.08 0.132 0.12 0.15 10.908 B B-C 0.87 0.06 5.842 A A C-AB 0.55 0.04 5.410 A A Queue (PCU) Delay (s) RFC LOS
C-AB 28.77 7.19 28.73 0.00 673.65 0.043 0.04 0.04 5.581 A B-A 1.67 0.11 10.004 A A C-A - - - - - A1 - 2020 Base
C-A 314.64 78.66 314.64 0.00 - - - - - - C-AB 0.54 0.04 5.406 A A A-B - - - - - Stream B-C 0.04 6.74 0.04 A
A-B 17.08 4.27 17.08 0.00 - - - - - - Stream B-A 0.03 9.14 0.02 A
C-A - - - - - A-C - - - - -
A-C 329.03 82.26 329.03 0.00 - - - - - - Stream C-AB 0.08 6.08 0.08 A
A-B - - - - -
Stream C-A - - - -
A-C - - - - -
Main results: (18:00-18:15) Stream A-B - - - -
Stream A-C - - - -
Stream
RFC
LOS Queueing Delay results: (17:45-18:00)
B-C 53.95 13.49 53.86 0.00 604.06 0.089 0.07 0.10 6.543 A Stream
B-A 61.66 15.41 61.42 0.00 351.05 0.176 0.15 0.21 12.419 B Values shown are the maximum values over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle.
B-C 1.09 0.07 6.113 A A
C-AB 35.24 8.81 35.19 0.00 651.51 0.054 0.04 0.06 5.840 A B-A 2.20 0.15 10.908 B B "D1 - 2018 0830 - 0930, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00
C-A 385.35 96.34 385.35 0.00 - - - - - - C-AB 0.67 0.04 5.581 A A "D2 - 2018 1630 - 1730, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00
A-B 20.92 5.23 20.92 0.00 - - - - - - "D3 - 2020 Base, AM " model duration: 08:30 - 10:00
C-A - - - - - "D4 - 2020 Base, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00
A-C 402.97 100.74 402.97 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - - "D5 - 2020 Base + Dev, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00
"D6 - 2020 Base + Dev, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00
A-C - - - - -
Run using Junctions 8.0.6.541 at 19/07/2018 14:22:40
5 6 7
p 172 p 173
B13
File summary Junction Network Options
Entry Flows
Title Govan Rd / Napier Rd
Left Normal/unknown
Location Govan - Glasgow
General Flows Data
Site Number
Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%)
Date 13/07/2018
Version Arms A
B
ONE HOUR
ONE HOUR
ü
ü
420.00
30.00
100.000
100.000
Status (new file)

C ONE HOUR ü 310.00 100.000
Identifier Arms
Client Arm Arm Name Description Arm Type Results
Turning Proportions
Jobnumber A A Govan Rd West Major
Enumerator team_batchfarm B B Napier Road Minor
Results Summary for whole modelled period
Description C C Govan Rd East Major
Total Total Inclusive
Turning Counts / Proportions (PCU/hr) - Junction 1 (for whole period) Max
Max Max
Max
Average
Junction Queueing
Average Rate Of Inclusive Total
Average
Stream Delay Queue Demand Queueing Queueing Delay Queueing Delay
RFC LOS Arrivals Delay (PCU- Queueing Delay
Analysis Options Major Arm Geometry To (s) (PCU) (PCU/hr)
(PCU) min)
(s)
A B C B-C 0.04 6.74 0.04 A 19.27 28.90 3.11 6.46 0.03 3.11 6.46
Vehicle Length Do Queue Calculate Residual Residual Capacity Criteria RFC Average Delay Threshold Queue Threshold
Arm Blocks?
(m) Variations Capacity Type Threshold (s) (PCU) carriageway (m) reserve reserve (m) turn bay Turn (m) Turn (m) (PCU) A 0.000 62.000 358.000 B-A 0.02 9.14 0.03 A 8.26 12.39 1.76 8.51 0.02 1.76 8.51
From
5.75 N/A 0.85 36.00 20.00 C 7.10 0.00 ü 4.20 104.00 ü 3.00 B 9.000 0.000 21.000 C-AB 0.08 6.08 0.08 A 40.38 60.57 5.87 5.82 0.07 5.87 5.82
Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D. C 266.000 44.000 0.000 C-A - - - - 244.08 366.12 - - - - -
Units A-B - - - - 56.89 85.34 - - - - -
Distance Units Speed Units Traffic Units Input Traffic Units Results Flow Units Average Delay Units Total Delay Units Rate Of Delay Units Minor Arm Geometry Turning Proportions (PCU) - Junction 1 (for whole period) A-C - - - - 328.51 492.76 - - - - -
m kph PCU PCU perHour s -Min perMin Lane Lane Lane Width at Estimate Flare To
Minor Width at Width at Width at Width at Visibility To Visibility To
Arm Width Width Width give-way Flare Length
Arm Type 5m (m) 10m (m) 15m (m) 20m (m) Left (m) Right (m)
(m) (Left) (m) (Right) (m) (m) Length (PCU) A B C
One lane A 0.00 0.15 0.85
(Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base, AM B plus

flare
10.00 4.20 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 0 0 From
B 0.30 0.00 0.70
C 0.86 0.14 0.00
Data Errors and Warnings Slope / Intercept / Capacity Main Results for each time segment
No errors or warnings
Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts Vehicle Mix Main results: (08:30-08:45)
Analysis Set Details Slope Slope Slope Slope Stream
RFC
LOS
Intercept (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s)
Specific Network Flow Reason For Junction Stream
(PCU/hr)
for for for for Average PCU Per Vehicle - Junction 1 (for whole period)
Roundabout Include In Use Specific Network Capacity B-C 15.81 3.95 15.70 0.00 591.18 0.027 0.00 0.03 6.256 A
Name
Capacity Model
Description
Report Demand Set(s)
Demand Set Locked Scaling Factor
Scaling Factor (%)
Scaling A-B A-C C-A C-B
(s) (%) Factors To B-A 6.78 1.69 6.72 0.00 457.56 0.015 0.00 0.01 7.984 A
1 B-A 573.534 0.099 0.251 0.158 0.359
(Default A B C C-AB 33.13 8.28 32.92 0.00 682.17 0.049 0.00 0.05 5.543 A
N/A ü 100.000 100.000 1 B-C 663.915 0.097 0.245 - -
Analysis Set)
A 1.000 1.000 1.040 C-A 200.26 50.06 200.26 0.00 - - - - - -
1 C-B 772.234 0.285 0.285 - - From
B 1.000 1.000 1.000 A-B 46.68 11.67 46.68 0.00 - - - - - -
Demand Set Details C 1.084 1.000 1.000 A-C 269.52 67.38 269.52 0.00 - - - - - -
Model Results
Model Model Time Single Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments.
Name
Scenario
Period Description Profile
Start Finish
Period
Segment
Central
Time
Locked
Run Use
Relationship Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Junction 1 (for whole period) Main results: (08:45-09:00)
Name Time Time Length Segment Automatically Relationship
(HH:mm) (HH:mm) (min) Only To
(min) Only Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay
Stream RFC LOS
Traffic Flows
2020 A B C
2020 ONE B-C 18.88 4.72 18.85 0.00 576.97 0.033 0.03 0.03 6.449 A
Base, AM 08:30 10:00 90 15 ü A 0.0 0.0 4.0
Base HOUR
AM From B-A 8.09 2.02 8.08 0.00 434.97 0.019 0.01 0.02 8.433 A
B 0.0 0.0 0.0
Demand Set Data Options C 8.4 0.0 0.0
C-AB 39.56 9.89 39.51 0.00 664.70 0.060 0.05 0.06 5.758 A
C-A 239.13 59.78 239.13 0.00 - - - - - -
Junction Network
PCU Estimate
Vehicle Mix Varies Mix Varies Mix Varies Turning Proportions Proportions Proportions A-B 55.74 13.93 55.74 0.00 - - - - - -
(PCU) counts A-C 321.83 80.46 321.83 0.00 - - - - - -
HV
Junctions ü ü Percentages
2.00 ü ü
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay
1 (untitled) T-Junction Two-w a y A,B,C 6.64 A Stream RFC LOS
B-C 23.12 5.78 23.08 0.00 557.28 0.041 0.03 0.04 6.738 A
B-A 9.91 2.48 9.88 0.00 403.81 0.025 0.02 0.02 9.138 A
C-AB 48.45 12.11 48.38 0.00 640.57 0.076 0.06 0.08 6.079 A
C-A 292.86 73.22 292.86 0.00 - - - - - -
2 3 4 A-B 68.26 17.07 68.26 0.00 - - - - - -
A-C 394.17 98.54 394.17 0.00 - - - - - -
p 174 p 175
B13
Main results: (09:15-09:30) Queueing Delay results: (09:00-09:15)
Stream
Total Demand
(PCU/hr)
Junction Arrivals
(PCU)
Entry Flow
(PCU/hr)
Pedestrian Demand
(Ped/hr)
Capacity
(PCU/hr)
RFC
Start Queue
(PCU)
End Queue
(PCU)
Delay
(s)
LOS Stream
min)
min/min)
Vehicle (s)
Service
Signalised Level Of
Service Junctions 8
B-C 23.12 5.78 23.12 0.00 557.27 0.041 0.04 0.04 6.738 A B-C 0.63 0.04 6.738 A A
PICADY 8 - Priority Intersection Module
B-A 9.91 2.48 9.91 0.00 403.79 0.025 0.02 0.03 9.139 A B-A 0.36 0.02 9.138 A A
Version: 8.0.6.541 [19821,26/11/2015]
C-AB 48.45 12.11 48.45 0.00 640.58 0.076 0.08 0.08 6.079 A C-AB 1.22 0.08 6.079 A A © Copyright TRL Limited, 2018 Generated on 19/07/2018 14:23:43 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
C-A 292.86 73.22 292.86 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - - For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL:
A-B 68.26 17.07 68.26 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - - Tel: +44 (0)1344 770758 email: software@trl.co.uk Web: http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk
The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution
A-C 394.17 98.54 394.17 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - - File summary
Main results: (09:30-09:45) Queueing Delay results: (09:15-09:30) Filename: Govan Rd_Napier Rd.arc8 Title Govan Rd / Napier Rd
Path: \\Coral\client projects\TI Proposals & Prequals\In preparation\Water Row, Govan CEF\Junction Modelling Location Govan - Glasgow
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of
Stream
RFC
(PCU) (PCU) (s)
LOS Stream
Report generation date: 19/07/2018 14:23:41 Site Number
B-C 18.88 4.72 18.91 0.00 576.95 0.033 0.04 0.03 6.453 A B-C 0.65 0.04 6.738 A A Date 13/07/2018
B-A 8.09 2.02 8.11 0.00 434.92 0.019 0.03 0.02 8.436 A B-A 0.37 0.02 9.139 A A Version
« (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base, PM
C-AB 39.56 9.89 39.63 0.00 664.70 0.060 0.08 0.06 5.759 A C-AB 1.23 0.08 6.079 A A Status (new file)
» Junction Network
C-A 239.13 59.78 239.13 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - - Identifier
» Arms
A-B 55.74 13.93 55.74 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - - » Traffic Flows Client
A-C 321.83 80.46 321.83 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - - » Entry Flows Jobnumber
» Turning Proportions Enumerator team_batchfarm
Main results: (09:45-10:00) Queueing Delay results: (09:30-09:45) » Vehicle Mix
Description
» Results
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of
Stream RFC LOS Stream
(PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s) min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service
B-C 15.81 3.95 15.84 0.00 591.15 0.027 0.03 0.03 6.259 A B-C 0.52 0.03 6.453 A A Summary of junction performance Analysis Options
B-A 6.78 1.69 6.79 0.00 457.46 0.015 0.02 0.02 7.989 A B-A 0.29 0.02 8.436 A A Vehicle Length Do Queue Calculate Residual Residual Capacity Criteria RFC Average Delay Threshold Queue Threshold
(m) Variations Capacity Type Threshold (s) (PCU)
C-AB 33.13 8.28 33.18 0.00 682.17 0.049 0.06 0.05 5.549 A C-AB 0.95 0.06 5.759 A A PM 5.75 N/A 0.85 36.00 20.00
C-A 200.26 50.06 200.26 0.00 - - - - - - C-A - - - - - Queue (PCU) Delay (s) RFC LOS
A-B 46.68 11.67 46.68 0.00 - - - - - - A-B - - - - - A1 - 2020 Base
A-C 269.52 67.38 269.52 0.00 - - - - - - A-C - - - - -
Units
Stream B-C 0.09 6.46 0.08 A
Distance Units Speed Units Traffic Units Input Traffic Units Results Flow Units Average Delay Units Total Delay Units Rate Of Delay Units
Stream B-A 0.20 12.08 0.17 B
Queueing Delay Results for each time segment Queueing Delay results: (09:45-10:00) Stream C-AB 0.03 5.71 0.03 A
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of Stream C-A - - - -
Stream
Queueing Delay results: (08:30-08:45) Stream A-B - - - -
Stream
min)
min/min)
Vehicle (s)
Service
Signalised Level Of
Service
B-C
B-A
0.42
0.23
0.03
0.02
6.259
7.989
A
A
A
A
Stream A-C - - - - (Default Analysis Set) - 2020 Base, PM
B-C 0.40 0.03 6.256 A A C-AB 0.77 0.05 5.549 A A
Data Errors and Warnings
B-A 0.22 0.01 7.984 A A C-A - - - - - Values shown are the maximum values over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle.
No errors or warnings
C-AB 0.76 0.05 5.543 A A A-B - - - - -
C-A - - - - - A-C - - - - - "D2 - 2018 1630 - 1730, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Analysis Set Details
A-B - - - - - "D3 - 2020 Base, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00
"D4 - 2020 Base, PM " model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 Specific Network Flow Reason For
A-C - - - - - Roundabout Include In Use Specific Network Capacity
"D5 - 2020 Base + Dev, AM" model duration: 08:30 - 10:00 Name Description Demand Set Locked Scaling Factor Scaling
Capacity Model Report Demand Set(s) Scaling Factor (%)
"D6 - 2020 Base + Dev, PM" model duration: 17:30 - 19:00 (s) (%) Factors
(Default
Queueing Delay results: (08:45-09:00) N/A ü 100.000 100.000
Run using Junctions 8.0.6.541 at 19/07/2018 14:23:40 Analysis Set)
Stream
B-C 0.50 0.03 6.449 A A Demand Set Details
B-A 0.28 0.02 8.433 A A Model Results
Model Model Time Single
C-AB 0.94 0.06 5.758 A A Name
Scenario
Period Description Profile
Start Finish
Period
Segment
Central
Time
Locked
Run Use
Relationship
Name Time Time Length Segment Automatically Relationship
C-A - - - - - Name Type Length Hour
(HH:mm) (HH:mm) (min) Only
(min) Only
A-B - - - - -
2020
2020 ONE
A-C - - - - - Base, PM 17:30 19:00 90 15 ü
Base HOUR
PM
Junction Network
6 7 1
Junctions
1 (untitled) T-Junction Two-w a y A,B,C 8.93 A
p 176 p 177
B13
Junction Network Options
Entry Flows Results
Left Normal/unknown
General Flows Data Results Summary for whole modelled period
Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) Total Total Inclusive
Arms
Max Max Junction Queueing Average Generated on 19/07/2018 14:23:43 using Junctions 8 (8.0.6.541)
A ONE HOUR ü 382.00 100.000 Stream
RFC
Delay Queue
LOS
Demand
Arrivals Delay (PCU-
Queueing Queueing Delay Queueing Delay
Queueing Delay
(s) (PCU) (PCU/hr) Delay (s) (PCU-min/min) (PCU-min)
(PCU) min) (s)
B ONE HOUR ü 99.00 100.000
B-C 0.08 6.46 0.09 A 40.38 60.56 6.16 6.10 0.07 6.16 6.10
C ONE HOUR ü 352.00 100.000
Arms B-A 0.17 12.08 0.20 B 50.47 75.70 13.72 10.88 0.15 13.73 10.88 Main results: (18:15-18:30)
Arm Arm Name Description Arm Type C-AB 0.03 5.71 0.03 A 18.35 27.53 2.53 5.52 0.03 2.53 5.52 Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay
Stream RFC LOS
Turning Proportions
A A Govan Rd West Major C-A - - - - 304.65 456.97 - - - - -
B-C 48.44 12.11 48.44 0.00 605.70 0.080 0.09 0.09 6.459 A
B B Napier Road Minor A-B - - - - 14.68 22.02 - - - - -
B-A 60.56 15.14 60.55 0.00 358.43 0.169 0.20 0.20 12.084 B
C C Govan Rd East Major A-C - - - - 335.85 503.77 - - - - -
Turning Counts / Proportions (PCU/hr) - Junction 1 (for whole period) C-AB 22.02 5.51 22.02 0.00 652.42 0.034 0.03 0.03 5.710 A
C-A 365.54 91.38 365.54 0.00 - - - - - -
Major Arm Geometry To
A-B 17.62 4.40 17.62 0.00 - - - - - -
A B C
Arm Blocks? A-C 402.97 100.74 402.97 0.00 - - - - - -
carriageway (m) reserve reserve (m) turn bay Turn (m) Turn (m) (PCU) A 0.000 16.000 366.000
From
C 7.10 0.00 ü 4.20 104.00 ü 3.00 B 55.000 0.000 44.000
Geometries for Arm C are measured opposite Arm B. Geometries for Arm A (if relevant) are measured opposite Arm D. C 332.000 20.000 0.000
Main Results for each time segment Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay
Stream RFC LOS
Minor Arm Geometry Turning Proportions (PCU) - Junction 1 (for whole period) Main results: (17:30-17:45) B-C 39.56 9.89 39.63 0.00 633.79 0.062 0.09 0.07 6.061 A
Lane Lane Lane Width at Estimate Flare To
Minor Width at Width at Width at Width at Visibility To Visibility To Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay B-A 49.44 12.36 49.66 0.00 386.07 0.128 0.20 0.15 10.707 B
Arm Width Width Width give-way Flare Length Stream RFC LOS
Arm Type 5m (m) 10m (m) 15m (m) 20m (m) Left (m) Right (m) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (s)
(m) (Left) (m) (Right) (m) (m) Length (PCU) A B C C-AB 17.98 4.49 18.01 0.00 674.41 0.027 0.03 0.03 5.486 A
One lane B-C 33.13 8.28 32.91 0.00 653.69 0.051 0.00 0.05 5.798 A
A 0.00 0.04 0.96 C-A 298.46 74.62 298.46 0.00 - - - - - -
B plus 10.00 4.20 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 0 0 From B-A 41.41 10.35 40.96 0.00 406.06 0.102 0.00 0.11 9.848 A
B 0.56 0.00 0.44 A-B 14.38 3.60 14.38 0.00 - - - - - -
flare C-AB 15.06 3.76 14.97 0.00 690.31 0.022 0.00 0.02 5.330 A
C 0.94 0.06 0.00 A-C 329.03 82.26 329.03 0.00 - - - - - -
C-A 249.95 62.49 249.95 0.00 - - - - - -
Slope / Intercept / Capacity A-B 12.05 3.01 12.05 0.00 - - - - - -
Priority Intersection Slopes and Intercepts Vehicle Mix A-C 275.54 68.89 275.54 0.00 - - - - - -
Stream
Total Demand
(PCU/hr)
Junction Arrivals
(PCU)
Entry Flow
(PCU/hr)
Pedestrian Demand
(Ped/hr)
Capacity
(PCU/hr)
RFC
Start Queue
(PCU)
End Queue
(PCU)
Delay
(s)
LOS
Intercept
Slope Slope Slope Slope Main results: (17:45-18:00) B-C 33.13 8.28 33.18 0.00 653.41 0.051 0.07 0.05 5.806 A
Junction Stream
(PCU/hr)
for for for for Average PCU Per Vehicle - Junction 1 (for whole period)
Total Demand Junction Arrivals Entry Flow Pedestrian Demand Capacity Start Queue End Queue Delay B-A 41.41 10.35 41.54 0.00 406.02 0.102 0.15 0.11 9.880 A
A-B A-C C-A C-B Stream
RFC
(PCU) (PCU) (s)
LOS
To C-AB 15.06 3.76 15.08 0.00 690.31 0.022 0.03 0.02 5.331 A
1 B-A 508.470 0.088 0.223 0.140 0.318 B-C 39.56 9.89 39.50 0.00 633.97 0.062 0.05 0.07 6.055 A
A B C C-A 249.95 62.49 249.95 0.00 - - - - - -
1 B-C 748.870 0.109 0.276 - - B-A 49.44 12.36 49.31 0.00 386.09 0.128 0.11 0.14 10.684 B
A 1.000 1.000 1.014 A-B 12.05 3.01 12.05 0.00 - - - - - -
1 C-B 772.234 0.285 0.285 - - From C-AB 17.98 4.49 17.96 0.00 674.40 0.027 0.02 0.03 5.483 A
B 1.000 1.000 1.000 A-C 275.54 68.89 275.54 0.00 - - - - - -
The slopes and intercepts shown above do NOT include any corrections or adjustments. C-A 298.46 74.62 298.46 0.00 - - - - - -
C 1.051 1.000 1.000
Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted. A-B 14.38 3.60 14.38 0.00 - - - - - -
Values are shown for the first time segment only; they may differ for subsequent time segments. Queueing Delay Results for each time segment
Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Junction 1 (for whole period) A-C 329.03 82.26 329.03 0.00 - - - - - -
To Queueing Delay results: (17:30-17:45)

Traffic Flows A B C
A 0.0 0.0 1.4 Stream
Total Demand
(PCU/hr)
Junction Arrivals
(PCU)
Entry Flow
(PCU/hr)
Pedestrian Demand
(Ped/hr)
Capacity
(PCU/hr)
RFC
Start Queue
(PCU)
End Queue
(PCU)
Delay
(s)
LOS
Stream
min)
min/min)
Vehicle (s)
Service
Signalised Level Of
Service
From B-C 0.77 0.05 5.798 A A
B 0.0 0.0 0.0 B-C 48.44 12.11 48.36 0.00 605.83 0.080 0.07 0.09 6.457 A
Demand Set Data Options C 5.1 0.0 0.0
B-A 1.61 0.11 9.848 A A
B-A 60.56 15.14 60.34 0.00 358.45 0.169 0.14 0.20 12.067 B
PCU Estimate C-AB 0.33 0.02 5.330 A A
Default Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle
Vehicle Mix Factor
Default
from
Turning Turning Turning C-AB 22.02 5.51 21.99 0.00 652.42 0.034 0.03 0.03 5.710 A
Vehicle Mix Varies Mix Varies Mix Varies Turning Proportions Proportions Proportions C-A - - - - -
Source for a HV entry/exit C-A 365.54 91.38 365.54 0.00 - - - - - -
(PCU) counts A-B - - - - -
A-B 17.62 4.40 17.62 0.00 - - - - - -
HV A-C - - - - -
ü ü 2.00 ü ü
Percentages A-C 402.97 100.74 402.97 0.00 - - - - - -

Stream
B-C 0.97 0.06 6.055 A A
B-A 2.12 0.14 10.684 B B
C-AB 0.41 0.03 5.483 A A
3 4 5 C-A - - - - -
A-B - - - - -
A-C - - - - -
p 178 p 179
B13
SYSTRA provides advice on transport, to central, regional and local government, agencies,
developers, operators and financiers.
Stream
B-C 1.27 0.08 6.457 A A A diverse group of results-oriented people, we are part of a strong team of professionals
B-A 2.91 0.19 12.067 B B worldwide. Through client business planning, customer research and strategy development we
C-AB 0.52 0.03 5.710 A A create solutions that work for real people in the real world.
C-A - - - - -
A-B - - - - -
For more information visit www.systra.co.uk
A-C - - - - -
Birmingham Hong Kong

Queueing Delay results: (18:15-18:30) 5th Floor, Lancaster House, Newhall St, 14th Floor West, Warwick House, TaiKoo Place,
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of Birmingham, B3 1NQ 979 King's Road, Island East, Hong Kong
Stream
min) min/min) Vehicle (s) Service Service T: +44 (0)121 233 7680 F: +44 (0)121 233 7681 T: +852 2529 7037 F: +852 2527 8490
B-C 1.30 0.09 6.459 A A
B-A 3.02 0.20 12.084 B B Dublin Shenzhen
2nd Floor, Riverview House, 21-23 City Quay Room 905, Excellence Mansion, No.98, No.1 Fuhua Road,
C-AB 0.52 0.03 5.710 A A Dublin 2,Ireland Futian Central Zone, Shenzhen, PRC, Post Code：518048
C-A - - - - - T: +353 (0)1 542 6000 F: +353 (0)1 542 6001 T：+86 755 3336 1898 F：+86 755 3336 2060
A-B - - - - -
Edinburgh Shenzhen - Beijing Branch Office
A-C - - - - - Prospect House, 5 Thistle Street, Edinburgh EH2 1DF Room 1503, Block C, He Qiao Mansion, No. 8 Guanghua Road,
United Kingdom Chaoyang District, Beijing, PRC, Post Code：100026
Queueing Delay results: (18:30-18:45) T: +44 (0)131 220 6966 T：+86 10 8557 0116 F：+86 10 8557 0126
Queueing Total Delay (PCU- Queueing Rate Of Delay (PCU- Average Delay Per Arriving Unsignalised Level Of Signalised Level Of Glasgow
Stream Beijing Joint Venture
Seventh Floor, 124 St Vincent Street Room 1507, Main Building, No. 60, Nan Li Shi Road,
B-C 1.03 0.07 6.061 A A Glasgow G2 5HF United Kingdom Xi Cheng District, Beijing, PRC, Post Code：100045
B-A 2.30 0.15 10.707 B B T: +44 (0)141 225 4400 T：+86 10 8807 3718 F：+86 10 6804 3744
C-AB 0.41 0.03 5.486 A A
Lille
C-A - - - - - Mumbai
86 Boulevard Carnot, 59000 Lille, France
Antriksh, Unit no. 301, 3rd Floor, CTS Nos.
A-B - - - - - T: +33 (0)3 74 07 00 F: +33 (0)1 53 17 36 01
773, 773/1 to 7, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East ,
A-C - - - - - Mumbai 400069
London T: +91 22 2647 3134
Seventh Floor, 15 Old Bailey B 307, Great Eastern Summit Sector - 15, CBD Belapur Navi
Queueing Delay results: (18:45-19:00) London EC4M 7EF United Kingdom Mumbai - 400 614
T: +44 (0)20 7529 6500 F: +44 (0)20 3427 6274 T: +91 22 2757 2745
Stream
B-C 0.82 0.05 5.806 A A Lyon New Delhi
11, rue de la République, 69001 Lyon, France 5th Floor Guru Angad Bhawan, 71 Nehru Place, New Delhi
B-A 1.77 0.12 9.880 A A T: +33 (0)4 72 10 29 29 F: +33 (0)4 72 10 29 28 110019
C-AB 0.34 0.02 5.331 A A T: +91 11 2641 3310
C-A - - - - - Manchester
25th Floor, City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza Noida
A-B - - - - - Manchester M1 4BT United Kingdom 3/F, C-131, Sector 2, Noida-201301, U.P.
A-C - - - - - T: +44 (0)161 236 0282 F: +44 (0)161 236 0095 T: +91 120 432 6999
Marseille Singapore
76, rue de la République, 13002 Marseille, France 25 Seah Street #04-01 Singapore 188381
T: +33 (0)4 91 37 35 15 F: +33 (0)4 91 91 90 14 T：+65 6227 3252 F：+65 6423 0178
Newcastle Thailand
PO Box 438, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE3 9BT 37th Floor, Unit F, Payatai Plaza Building,128/404-405 Payathai
United Kingdom Road, Rajthewee, Bangkok 10400, Thailand
T: +44 (0)191 2136157 T：+662 216 6652 F：+662 216 6651
Paris
Vietnam
72 rue Henry Farman, 75015 Paris, France
5/F Perfect Building, Le Thi Hong Gam St, District 1,
T: +33 (0)1 53 17 36 00 F: +33 (0)1 53 17 36 01
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
T：+84 8 3821 7183 F：+84 8 3821 6967
Woking
Dukes Court, Duke Street
Woking, Surrey GU21 5BH United Kingdom
T: +44 (0)1483 728051 F: +44 (0)1483 755207
p 180 p 181

Part B Water Row Appendices Full Spreads Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part B Water Row Appendices Full Spreads Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Water Row, Govan

B7 Art Strategy Approach 54

B8 Briefing Document for Commercial Viability 58

B9 Cook Creative Statement of Potential 68

B10 Desktop S.I. Executive Summary 72

B11 Tree Survey 74

B12 Floor Risk Analysis 92

B13 Traffic Impact Assessment 128

Event 4J – Water Row Showpeople

Shingle B Red line boundary updated to inlcude open space to 26/3/18 ML

support the Masterplan Document Part A.

Condition A - through Pearce Lane

Mean Low Water Springs

ard Landing Stage

War Meml e In CE 11 nry

Condition B - through Water Row

10 DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING

REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,

LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND

779 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council

Water Row Masterplan

Existing Site Plan

February 2018 ML 1:500 @ A0 / 1: 1250 @ A3

24 AINSLIE PLACE, EDINBURGH, EH3 6AJ

Serial number: 128517

Block F added to area schedule.

Total units 200

ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY

Govan Housing Association / CGAP / Glasgow City Council

894 788 DATE - BY - SCALE -

The Pearce Institute e 779 5.5

Block F added to area schedule.

Block F added to area schedule.

Refer to Roof Plan

Refer to Roof Plan

Total units 200 Raised deck

10 10 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888

REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,

894 788 DATE - BY - SCALE -

TELEPHONE +44(0)141 552 3001 FAX +44(0)141 552 3888

T 21 TELEPHONE +44 (0)131 516 2270

Character Zones and Typologies Character Zones and Typologies

2B38 4P Terrace Houses28and Flats 1B472P CornerTotal

Total units 47 Total units 28 Total units 46 Total units 25 31

(over 3 stories) (double height) (double height) (double height)

NA Flats 187 11.5sqm TYPE_01 TYPE_01 11.5sqm

Shingle 75sqm 75sqm

Block F Block A Block B Block C Block D Block E Block G

WORK AND ANY DISCREPANCIES NOTIFIED IN WRITING. 5 TE

REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING,

LIGHTING, POWER, EXTERNAL AND UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE AND

G h Mean High Water Springs

ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

r c h TE Total units 201 TYPE_01 TYPE_01

Section Option 2 Ground

DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING

Section Option 1 Ground

23 ALL BUILDING WORKS TO COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS TO CURRENT

29 DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING ry TE

REFER TO ENGINEERS' DRAWINGS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL, HEATING, CLIENT -

Water Row Masterplan