Posted in: Questions | Posted on: October 17, 2015
If the Gladman Development goes ahead, what proposals have been put forward to make the flow of traffic on White Post Road better? Parking and traffic flow due to the school run and when car boot sales are on make this road congested and dangerous!
I hope the following information answers your question. But to summarise a roundabout junction has been suggested as an access point to the site and that Wykham Lane is closed to traffic.
In July 2015 Ashley Helme prepared a Transport Assessment on behalf of Gladman Developments. It is in three parts and can be viewed here –
I have however taken some key points from this document for you –
The proposed access strategy for the Site is:
• Vehicles: Single access on White Post Road,
• Pedestrians/cycles: Access on White Post Road, Salt Way and Wykham Lane
– it is proposed that waiting restrictions are introduced in the vicinity of the proposed Site access to ensure that parked vehicles have no detrimental impact on the operation of the proposed Site access junction. It is also proposed that car parking is provided within the Site to accommodate parking displaced by the proposed waiting restrictions.
– The internal road layout for the outline application is to be the subject of reserved matters application(s). However, it is acknowledged that there is an aspiration to provide a ‘link road’ between Bloxham Road and White Post Road that is aimed primarily at providing access to development that will come forward within the Banbury 17 allocation area. Consequently, the applicant proposes to provide a road through the application Site between White Post Road and the western boundary of the Site.
JUNCTION ARRANGEMENTS: WHITE POST ROAD
10.2.1 In the event that the internal road network within the proposed scheme is linked with the road network within the Wykham Park Farm scheme then this would form a road connection between Bloxham Road and White Post Road. In such a situation, traffic generated by the Banbury 17 sites to the west of the application scheme with origins/destinations to the east, may elect to use the Site Access/White Post Road junction. AHA has investigated the feasibility of introducing a roundabout junction on White Post Road to serve the proposed development and other Banbury 17 sites. Drg 1361/12/A presents an indicative roundabout junction.
10.2.2 A roundabout junction is considered the most suitable form of access junction for the following reasons:
• A priority controlled junction will not have sufficient capacity to cope with estimated traffic demands if a link road is provided,
• A roundabout provides a consistent approach across the local area. There is an existing roundabout junction at TA SJ2 circa100m north of the proposed Site access, and proposed roundabout junctions at the access to the WPF development and the College Fields development,
• The OCC Banbury highway model forecasting report assumes the link road/White Post Road junction will be a roundabout junction, suggesting this is the preferred option of OCC.
10.5.6.1 OCC in their 1 April 2015 pre-application consultation response set out that:
“The spine road will i) help with the management of traffic across the network (including deterring use of Wykham Lane as a though route)…” Thus, it is clear that an aspiration of the highway authority is to reduce traffic movements along Wykham Lane and a new link road between White Post Road and Bloxham Road can facilitate that change.
10.5.6.2 For the purposes of the OCC Sensitivity Test, it is assumed that all ‘Base’ traffic movements between White Post Road/High Street and Wykham Lane are reassigned to the Site/White Post Road junction. This is a robust assumption. In effect, this would represent the situation in Wykham Lane is closed to traffic.
I have also added comments from the ‘Oxfordshire County Council’s Response To Consultation ON The Following Development Proposal’ –
The original document can be viewed here – http://npa.cherwell.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/08187818.pdf
The Transport section runs from pages 2-13.
I have read through it and picked through the relevant points. It is rather long so please bear with –
This application forms the eastern part of the strategic site allocation Banbury 17 within the adopted Cherwell Local Plan. Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) object to this application for the following reasons:
We have identified a number of inadequacies with the Transport Assessment which lead us to the conclusion that it fails to demonstrate adequately the impact of the development on the local transport network.
Lisa Michelson, Locality Manager Date: 04 September 2015
Objection is recommended on the basis that the proposal is contrary to Local Plan policy Banbury 17, and the application fails to demonstrate that the proposal would not cause a severe impact on the local transport network or offer any mitigation for its impact.
Should the Local Planning Authority be minded to grant planning consent, I would recommend the following conditions:
Close Existing Accesses Prior to the first use of the access hereby approved, the existing accesses onto Wykham Lane shall be permanently stopped up by means of [insert] and shall not be used by any vehicular traffic whatsoever.
Banbury 17 Policy Area – Masterplan The Local Plan Banbury 17 Policy stipulates that there must be a site wide masterplan. The Banbury 17 policy area has come forward through three separate planning applications: it is a policy requirement that each provides and is accompanied by a joint Banbury 17 wide masterplan. As yet a Banbury 17 masterplan has not been submitted with any of the applications. Therefore the application is not compliant with Banbury 17 policy.
Provision of the Banbury 17 Spine Road – The application does not contain a scaled layout plan that confirms the location of the spine road, running from this application site west to the Gallagher application area. The application site is dependent on delivery of the spine road between A361 (Bloxham Rd) and A4260 (Oxford Road), linking into a junction at White Post Road. Without a Masterplan in place, to which all parties are signed up to, delivery of the spine road is not established and therefore the application site is contrary to Banbury 17 Policy.
Moreover, the position of the spine road within the development is dependent on the location of various land uses within the overall Banbury 17 allocation, so the position indicated in this application may not connect with the adjacent site in a suitable location. Again, a masterplan is required to determine the position of the entire spine road.
Access to the Saltway Path – The Saltway is a restricted byway and the application needs to be clear about how access from the development to the Saltway will be achieved, including preventing any type of ransom strip from occurring, or highlighting where 3rd party land is required. Routes across Salt Way are critical to the pedestrian connectivity of the application site. Three points of access from the application site to the Saltway restricted byway are proposed: it is not clear if these are deliverable, and if the onward routes to key off site destinations are suitable for both walking and cycling. No walking or cycling facilities audits have taken place to key off site destinations; these were requested in the pre-application advice.
Site Access at White Post Road – It is noted that a priority junction, where by the development spine road is the minor arm, and a three armed roundabout have been assessed. A third option exists where by a priority junction is created, however the major priority is given to the development spine road and the north section of White Post Road (leading to Sycamore Drive roundabout), and the minor arm is White Post Road south. This arrangement has not been assessed. It is recommended this option is assessed, in order to confirm (with a full spine road in place) which of the three options is the optimum junction type. It is agreed that the priority junction, where by the development spine road is the minor arm, is not suitable to serve the Banbury 17 policy area and should not be progressed. Whichever junction arrangement is confirmed as providing the optimum solution, this will be required from the 1st occupation of this application site, an interim solution will not be suitable.
Dimensions and intervisibility splays need to be provided for the roundabout general arrangement drawing, before this can be assessed. The access arrangements should also be modified to provide improved facilities for cyclists heading south on White Post Road from Salt Way, allowing them to avoid using the roundabout, particularly as this is a strategic, national cycle route (NCN 5). The walking route from Salt Way is a well-used route to school and therefore suitable crossing facilities (other than tactiles at roundabout splitter islands) to assist in negotiating the site access junction should be provided in either option.
Visibility splays for the cricket club access should be shown and justified. This should be treated as a junction rather than a vehicle cross over.
Clarification is needed on whether the pedestrian access to the cricket club is through the middle of the car park. I would like to see it separated from the car park or alongside it rather than through the middle.
Parking restrictions are proposed as part of the access arrangements. It is agreed that this will be necessary (although will be difficult to enforce) but it is likely to displace the school parking further towards residential areas and along the spine road. The extent of the parking restrictions will need careful consideration.
If parking restrictions are not extended back for a significant distance along the spine road, it is likely to be used for school parking, which will need to be taken into account in the bus tracking. It will also affect the morning peak hour operation of the junction, with more traffic using the spine road.
Joy White, Principal Transport Planner, Date: 27 August 2015
Back to questions