PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT BICESTER GATEWAY …

Turner Lowe Associates TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 22 Guest Road. Manchester. M25 3DL. Tel. 0161 798 7898 Fax. 0161 798 6642

PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT

BICESTER GATEWAY OXFORD ROAD

BICESTER

TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT

February 2015

Consolidated Properties Group

tomplant

Typewritten Text

CD 10

T L A Proposed Mixed Use Development Bicester Gateway. Oxford Road. Bicester Transportation Assessment

Turner Lowe Associates

PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT

BICESTER GATEWAY

OXFORD ROAD BICESTER

TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT

February 2015

Consolidated Properties Group Job. No. 150203 Authorised By: J. Lowe Position: Partner

Signed: Date: 24 February 2015 This report is for the sole use of Consolidated Properties Group (the Client) and Turner Lowe Associates in connection with the above project. No undertaking or responsibilities are given to any other party. Reproduction of any part of this report is expressly forbidden without the approval of Turner Lowe Associates and the Client. Turner Lowe Associates.



Contents Page 1. Introduction 1 2. Surrounding Highway Network Details 2 3. Modes of Travel and Improvements to be Provided by 4

Development 4. Pedestrian Accessibility 6 5. Public Transport Accessibility 8 6. Vehicle Accessibility 9

i. Proposed Development 9 ii. Assessment Periods 9 iii. Design Year and Base Traffic Flows 10 iv. Committed Developments 10 v. Development Traffic Generation 11

a. Food Retail Trip Rates and Trip Types 12 b. Non-Food Retail Trip Rates and Trip Types 13 c. Restaurant Trip Rates and Trip Types 14 d. Gymnasium Trip Rates and Trip Types 15

vi. Development Traffic Distribution Patterns and 16 Traffic Effects a. Food Retail Trips 16 b. Non-Food Retail Trips 17 c. Restaurant Trips 18 d. Gym Trips 18

vii. Total Effects of Development 19 viii. Design Traffic Flows 19 ix. Assessment of Effects of Development 19

a. Pre-Improvement Assessment A41 / Esso 21 Roundabout b. Pre-Improvement Assessment Oxford Road / 22

Pingle Drive Roundabout x. Parking Demand and Provision 22 xi. Parking Strategy and Management 24 xii. Servicing and Service Vehicle Manoeuvres 25 xiii. Road Safety 25 xiv. Construction Issues 26



7. Pedal Cycle Accessibility 27 8. Conclusions 28 Figures Appendices Drawings


Turner Lowe Associates 1

1. Introduction 1.1 This report assesses the traffic and highway issues associated with a proposed

Mixed Retail and Leisure development on Oxford Road at the gateway to Bicester, Oxfordshire.

1.2 The development site is located on the west side of the A41 Oxford Road to the

south of the town centre (Figure 1). The site is part of the South West Bicester (SWB) or “Kingsmere” development and the part of the SWB that would be occupied by the proposed development has already been granted planning consent for Business Park uses

1.3 The South West Bicester development will have a number of access points but the

closest to the development site is on the A41 just to the south of the site (already in use providing access to the Hotel that has recently opened).

1.4 Most of the internal highway spine roads associated with the SWB development

have already been constructed including the new Southern Perimeter Road which will serve the SWB development and provide a new link from the A41 to the A495 Chesterton Road / Middleton Stoney Road. This was identified in the Cherwell Local Plan and the County Councils Bicester Integrated Transport Study as a much needed District Distributor road to allow for Bicester’s future traffic needs. Following its completion it was designated as part of the B4030 and Middleton Stoney Road that previously had this designation was downgraded.

1.5 Subject to a few minor alterations as detailed in this assessment and shown on the

Highway Works drawing (150203/01, a copy of which can be found in the drawings section of this report, the existing SWB internal highways will provide access to the site.

1.6 This report assesses the traffic and highway implications of the proposed

development. Accessibility by other modes of transport and the parking facilities to be provided on site are also considered to demonstrate that the development complies with current National and Local transportation planning policies.

1.7 This report utilises parameters that have been agreed with the Highway Authority

for other proposed developments in the recent past to avoid the introduction of new information, wherever possible.



2.0 Surrounding Highway Network Details 2.1 The site is located on the western side of the A41 Oxford Road. Highways and

highway features in the area can be seen in Figure 2.

2.2 The A41 provides the main access route in to Bicester from the M40 and Oxford to the south west. It is a high standard dual carriageway subject to a 40 mph speed limit.

2.3 Immediately to the north of the site the A41 continues to the east as Boundary Way.

Oxford Road continues into Bicester town centre to the north as a local distributor road. A petrol filling station and other services are also accessed from this junction which is currently a roundabout, recently improved to provide a dedicated left turn slip road from the A41 Boundary Way (east) to the A41 Oxford Road (south).

2.4 As part of a recent approved pair of developments that will provide a new Tesco

store to the south of the A41 on the south east corner of the A41 roundabout, and an extension to the Bicester Village Retail Outlet, the roundabout will be converted to a signalised gyratory.

2.5 Oxford Road continues to the north to the Pingle Drive junction with the speed

limit reducing to 30 mph north of the junction. Pingle Drive provides access to the existing Tesco and Bicester Village stores, again in the form of a roundabout that will be converted to a signalised gyratory as part of the new Tesco / Bicester Village Extension developments.

2.6 Oxford Road continues and connects to Middleton Stoney Road to the north. This

used to be part of the B4030 but has now been down-graded. As part of the South West Bicester development traffic calming measures are to be introduced in this area as the development progresses.

2.7 To the south of the site the new South West Perimeter Road through the South

West Bicester development site now connects the A41 to the A4095 Howes Lane at the end of Middleton Stoney Road. Traffic that previously only had the A41 and Middleton Stoney Road to access the western part of Bicester now has two possible routes.

2.8 The A41 Oxford Road is a bus route with stops close to the proposed development

site. The new Tesco development will create a new traffic signal controlled junction on the A41 with pedestrian crossing facilities. This new junction would be provided in any event should the already approved Business Park development (part of the site of which will be used for the Tesco store) go ahead before the Tesco scheme.



2.9 The A41 form part of National Cycle Route 51 and the pedestrian facilities to be provided at the new Tesco junction will enable cyclists to cross the A41 to access the proposed development.

2.10 The site clearly has good vehicle and with the proposed measures alternative mode

accessibility to the surrounding area.



3. Modes of Travel and Improvements to be Provided by Development 3.1 As will be seen in Section 6 the traffic generation of the proposed development has

been based on trip rates used in recent development proposals that have been accepted by the Highway Authority, to avoid introducing new information.

3.2 These accepted developments did not provide trip rates for other modes of travel.

3.3 The approved new Tesco development also did not provide any estimate of the likely number of trips by modes other than the car.

3.4 To give an indication of the likely spilt in trips by different modes without

introducing new database searches the National Trip End model has been used to determine the current split of “Shopping” and “Employment” trips in Bicester. It is accepted that the National Trip End model’s “Shopping” and “Employment” trips covers all shopping and employment trips wherever the destination may, be but this should give a general indication of what could be expected for the proposed development.

Mode Percentage Shopping Trips Employment Trips Weekdays Saturdays Weekdays Saturdays Car Driver 35 33 65 60 Car Passenger 25 34 14 19 Foot 36 29 14 15 Public Transport 3 3 4 2 Cycle 1 1 3 4 Total 100 100 100 100

3.5 The site benefits from being within the South West Bicester development area which

when complete will provide around 1600 new homes. To ensure trips on foot or by cycle are encouraged from this area links will be provided from the proposed development directly into the SWB site on the most natural desire lines.

3.6 Covered cycle parking facilities will be provided close to the proposed

development entrances to further encourage use of cycles. 3.7 A new pedestrian footway will be provided from the site to the access to be

constructed for the new Tesco store (which will have pedestrian crossing facilities). 3.8 To the north of the site there is no footway on the western side of the A41. The

concept of the SWB Masterplan was to discourage use of the A41 for trips to Bicester Town Centre / Existing Tesco / Bicester Village Retail Outlet with this



being provided through the SWB development. These routes will also be used for trips to / from the proposed development.

3.9 As will be seen in following chapters, the site will be accessible to a wide

surrounding population by means of transport other than the car and the development will encourage use of such modes wherever possible.

3.10 The proposed development has adopted a holistic approach to encouraging trips by

all modes of transport in line with current transportation planning policies.



4.0 Pedestrian Accessibility 4.1 The site is within easy walking distance of a wide surrounding catchment area. 4.2 The DTLR publication “By Design: Better Places to Live, A companion guide to

PPG3” advises that when considering new residential development the area within 10 minutes walking time or 800 m walking distance should be examined to determine the range of facilities which residents could access comfortably on foot. Whilst the parent document PPG3 has now been superseded this advice is still valid. The same logic would therefore be appropriate to determine the area which would be within a comfortable walking distance or time of the proposed development. This is also the preferred maximum walking distance for town centre journeys on foot as advised by the Institution of Highways and Transportation in their publication ‘Guidelines for Providing for Journeys on Foot’.

4.3 Whilst now superseded by the National Planning Policy Framework, the advice in

the former PPG13 is still relevant and advised that walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly under 2 kilometres. Assuming a round trip of 2 km for a shopping trip, a single way walking distance of 1 km would, therefore, be considered acceptable.

4.4 The site location and the areas within an 800 m and 1 km radius are shown in

Figure 3. 4.5 As can be seen, a significant part of Bicester and the soon to be completed South

West Bicester development (of around 1600 dwellings) would be within these comfortable walking distances. This and the following diagram indicate “as the crow flies” distances. The science behind the derivation of these distances is far from exact and any more detailed catchment areas would not have any greater reliability (in fact less by indicating with what may appear to be accuracy areas that would not be within walking distance which may be perfectly accessible on foot).

4.6 In fact when the original 1 km walking distance for trips on foot was quoted in

various guidance in the 1990’s, the average walking distance per trip on foot from the National Travel Survey was 0.6 miles (or 966m) hence the 1km distance. This rose to 0.7 miles from 2002 to 2012 and again to 0.8 miles (1.29km) in 2013 (National Travel Survey Output reproduced in Appendix A). Despite the logic behind the original advice changing, recommended distances have not been updated from 1990’s advice.

4.7 For employment trips a 2 km walk in each direction would be appropriate and this

is also the preferred maximum walking distance for commuting journeys on foot as advised by the Institution of Highways and Transportation in their publication ‘Guidelines for Providing for Journeys on Foot’. The area within such a catchment is shown in Figure 4. As can be seen this covers virtually all of Bicester amd all of



the South West Bicester development area from where staff who could walk to the development on foot could be recruited.

4.8 As detailed above there will be pedestrian links into the proposed development site

from the South West Bicester area and a new footway will be provided on the A41 linking the development site to the access to be created for the new Tesco store (which will have pedestrian crossing facilities.

4.9 The site is clearly accessible on foot (especially considering the new footway to be

provided) and its location in relation to the surrounding areas is likely to encourage trips to the development to be made on foot and a potential reduction in car use.



5. Public Transport Accessibility 5.1 The site is well served by public transport with two services passing the site on the

A41 at the present time. 5.2 Bus routes and the areas covered are shown in Figure 5 5.3 As part of the South West Bicester Development some of the services are to be

routed through the SWB development area and will use the same access as will be used to serve the proposed development. Bus stops have already been constructed to accommodate these services which are directly outside the site on the internal access road (indeed one of the stops will have to be relocated slightly to accommodate the proposed development’s servicing lay-by for the restaurants).

5.4 We also understand that new stops are being considered for the new Tesco store on

the A41. With the pedestrian facilities to be provided as part of the Tesco access it will be an easy matter for bus users to walk to / from the proposed development and the new Tesco stops.

5.5 The bus services currently operating past the application site are:

i The S5 and NS5 linking Arncott to Oxford with a frequency of around 20 minutes during Monday to Friday, 15 to 20 minutes on a Saturday and hourly on a Sunday;

ii. The X5 linking Cambridge to Oxford with a frequency of around 30 minutes

during Monday to Friday, 30 minutes on a Saturday and hourly on a Sunday; and

There is also the X86 linking Northampton to Oxford is infrequent and runs 4

times a day Monday to Friday. 5.6 Bicester Town Railway station is just over 1km from the site based on a simple

“as the crow flies” distance. Using the highways between the station and the site the travel distance would be around 1.5km.

5.7 Rail could, therefore, be used as part of a cycling or public transport based staff

trip which would mean that staff could reside further way from the store. The number of such trips is likely to be minimal but details of the rail facilities will be included in the development’s Staff Travel Plan.

5.8 It is clear that the site has good public transport accessibility and is well located in

accordance with current transportation planning policies.



6. Vehicle Accessibility

i. Proposed Development

6.1 The proposed development would consist of a variety of uses as below: Unit 1 Food Retail (M&S) 929 sq m ground floor Non-Food Retail (M&S) 929 sq m ground floor Non-Food Retail (M&S) 1,858 sq m mezzanine Unit 2 Non-Food Retail 929 sq m ground floor Non-Food Retail 836 sq m mezzanine Unit 3 Non-Food Retail 987 sq m ground floor Non-Food Retail 840 sq m first floor mezzanine Non-Food Retail 615 sq m second floor mezzanine

Unit 4 Restaurant 459 sq m ground floor

Unit 5 Restaurant 329 sq m ground floor

Unit 6 Restaurant 380 sq m ground floor Unit 7 Gym 1185 first floor (also lobby area which has

no traffic generation effect) 6.2 The proposed development would replace the already approved 20,000 sq m

Employment development on the same site.

ii. Assessment Periods 6.3 The worst case time periods for assessing the effects of a retail / restaurant

development is usually the weekday pm peak hour when high development flows combine with the greatest background traffic flows to give the worst case combined flows. The situation on a Saturday can also produce similar effects around lunch times.

6.4 In this location the existing traffic situation is due to change in the future as a result

of the rest of the South West Bicester development site being completed, and the recently approved new Tesco store and extension to the Bicester Village Retail schemes being implemented. The new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension schemes will provide significant changes to the highway arrangement on the A41 and Bicester Village access and these works were assessed allowing for the completion of the South West Bicester development and other committed developments as part of those scheme’s planning applications. That assessment



work determined the peak hours to be 17.00 – 18.00 in the week and 12.00 – 13.00 on Saturdays.

6.5 As detailed below, the proposed development’s traffic generation will be very small

compared to the background traffic and will be relatively constant throughout the peak periods. The proposed development will not result in the actual 60 minute periods changing. These periods have therefore been retained for this assessment.

iii. Design Year and Base Traffic Flows

6.6 The starting point for this assessment will be the situation that is predicted to exist

with the completion of the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension developments and their accompanying highway alterations. As a check on the situation that may prevail if the implementation of these schemes is delayed, a test has also been undertaken on the basis of the predicted flows without the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension (i.e. with the existing Tesco and Bicester Village) but with other committed developments being allowed for and the existing highway arrangements.

6.7 A design year of 5 years post the date of a planning application is usually taken to

be an appropriate design year for developments that are not located on, or would not have a material effect on, the Trunk Road network (which is the case here). The new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension were assessed on the basis of 2017 and 2024 design years. For consistency, therefore, a design year of 2024 has been assumed for the assessment of the proposed development in conjunction with the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension and their highway alterations, and 2017 for the test assuming the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension is delayed (i.e. existing highway arrangements).

6.8 The study area for this assessment has been taken to be the area covered by the

detailed modelling exercise that was undertaken for the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension. Beyond this area the effects of the proposed development would be negligible and far less than the effects of the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension (that were not considered to require the expansion of the model used in those scheme’s assessments).

6.9 The 2024 traffic flows with the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension are

shown in Figure 6. The 2017 traffic flows without the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension but with other committed developments and the existing Tesco and Bicester Village development are shown in Figure 7.

iv. Committed Developments

6.10 The base traffic flows shown in Figures 6 and 7 allow for all committed

developments that the new Tesco and Bicester Village Extension were required to make allowance for. The effects of the completion for the South West Bicester development and other approved schemes are therefore accounted for in the Figure



6 and 7 flows.

v. Approved Development To Be Replaced By Proposed Development 6.10 The proposed development will replace the employment development that has

already been approved for this part of the SWB site. 6.11 The SWB application supporting information determined this use to have a likely

24 arrivals / 218 departures in the pm peak period (the am peak period was also considered but this is not relevant to the current exercise). Employment uses of the type being considered would not be expected to generate any material traffic flows on Saturdays and this was not considered in the SWB assessment work.

6.12 It was assumed that this traffic would follow the distribution pattern below:

Route Percentage of Total

Bicester 40.8% North 8.3%

East 11.4% South (M40) 2.9% South (A34) 32.5%

West 4.1% 6.13 To provide robustness (by minimising the reduction in the base flows) for this

assessment, it has been assumed that the employment trips attracted from the west would use the internal site highways (whereas in reality, with the development being located directly on the A41, these trips could use the A41 to travel north and then Middleton Stoney Road to travel west). It has also been assumed that trips to the north would go around Bicester Town Centre on the A41 and not through it and that 30% of the “Bicester” trips would also use the A41 Ring Road.

6.14 The SWB assessment converted all predicted flows to Passenger Car Units by

increasing vehicle numbers by 2.5%. On this basis the pm peak hour effects of the employment uses would be as shown in Figure 8. v. Development Traffic Generation

6.15 As in the case of almost all recently approved developments in the Highway

Authority’s jurisdiction, the traffic generation potential of the proposed development has been estimated using trip rates from the TRICS database. In most cases the trips rates that have been adopted have been previously accepted in assessments for other schemes, and new information requiring further agreement with the Highway Authority has been avoided.



6.16 The TRICS database is a national database of survey information collected at developments of different types with the observed arrivals / departures converted to trip rates (the number of trips per 100 sq m floor area in the case of retail developments) so they may be used to estimate the likely traffic generation of developments of different sizes.

a. Food Retail Trip Rates and Trip Types

6.17 The foodstore use will be part of a larger M&S store with the main floor area of this

unit occupied by non-food retail uses. Trip rates for stand-alone foodstores (where the main use is food retailing) are not, therefore, representative of the situation that will prevail here. The recently approved Banbury Gateway development (11/01870) had a M&S store with a food sales area of 1115 sq m (very similar to what is proposed here) which was assessed on the basis of the following trip rates:

Land Use Weekday PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures M&S Food 7.565 7.696 5.246 5.656 Note: Trip rates are trips per 100 sq m development Saturday peak hour was 12.00 – 13.00, same as Bicester.

6.18 The Banbury scheme’s assessment assumed that 50% of these food trips would originate from trips that would be made to the other uses on the site. The other uses on the Banbury Gateway scheme had significantly greater floor areas than the other uses on the proposed development site. There will, however, be some shared trips and to provide a robust assessment it has been assumed that instead of the previously accepted 50%, here there would be 20% shared trips.

6.19 The rest of the food trips would not be “new” trips, i.e. trips that were it not for the

proposed development would not be made. Whilst there could be some new trips where a foodstore was being introduced into an area that did not have a local foodstore (which would enable “spur of the moment” trips to be made because there was now a foodstore on the doorstep instead of a large weekly shop to a more distant store), here the question would be “Why would there be any new trips when there is a large Tesco and other foodstores close by ?” If a resident wanted to buy something at the present time they would simply go and buy it from one of the many existing stores within an easy drive of the possible trip origins. The proposed development will simply provide an alternative source for whatever they want to by in any event.

6.20 It is usual to assume that a proportion of the trips to a retail development would be

made by people passing the site in any event as part of a different trip purpose (such as the journey home from work) thereby avoiding the need for a separate trip at a different time. Previously a figure of 30% was previously generally used. More



recent research has shown that the level of pass-by trips is dependant on the level of traffic on the main road (which is logical) and that on busy main roads this could be between 25 – 35% (of the development’s traffic generation, not the traffic on the main road). On lower standard roads the percentage would be expected to be lower.

6.21 The location of the proposed development next to the A41 would be such that

pass-by trip rates of 25 – 35% would be considered appropriate. The 30% used in other recently accepted Transportation Assessments is, therefore, considered appropriate for the proposed development in both the weekday and Saturday situations.

6.22 The rest of the trips would be trips which transfer from existing shopping trips

being made to other existing food retail locations. Whether these appear as new trips in the vicinity of the development depends upon the origins of these trips and the routes used to visit the existing stores they transfer from.

6.23 On the basis of the above trips rates and trip type assumptions the effects of the

food element of the proposed development would be as shown in Table 6.1 below.

b. Non-Food Retail Trip Rates and Trip Types 6.19 The recently approved Banbury Gateway development (11/01870) was assessed on

the basis of the following trip rates for its proposed non-food retail use. The Banbury scheme has a larger non-food retail floor area than the proposed scheme but the assessment of that scheme used rates that would be appropriate for smaller scale developments to provide robustness.

Land Use Weekday PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Non-Food Retail 0.659 0.628 1.940 1.691 Note: Trip rates are trips per 100 sq m development

6.20 The proposed development will have mezzanines in each unit (two in Unit 3). Mezzanine levels in retail stores do not generate traffic at the same rates as ground level retail uses. For the proposed retail development on the Kraft Foods site in Banbury (12/00329) the Highway Authority agreed with the promoters of that scheme that upper levels in the retail units would be likely to generate traffic at 30% of the rate agreed for the ground level use.

6.21 The Banbury Gateway Scheme (11/01870) assessment assumed that 30% of the

non-food trips would originate from trips that would be made to the other uses on the site (a similar size M&S food use and 661 sq m Restaurant use - 57% of the size of the combined restaurants in the proposed scheme). Given the larger restaurants



proposed in the proposed Bicester scheme (and corresponding higher “pool” from which the shared trips could be drawn) traffic generation, use of the previously accepted 30% rate should lead to a robust assessment of the effects of the proposed development.

6.22 For this use whilst the traffic will predominately be trips that are transferred from

existing trips to non-food uses elsewhere (considered in detail below) it may be that some true “New” trips are generated as a result of the specific occupiers. A figure of 10% has therefore been assumed.

6.23 The rest of the trips will either be trips that were being made for another purpose

which involved passing the site on the A40 (Pass-by trips) or transferred trips from other existing developments. For this assessment a figure of 30% has been assumed for Pass-By Trips and 30% for Transferred trips for both assessment periods.

6.24 This leads to the effects shown in Table 6.1.

c. Restaurant Trip Rates and Trip Types 6.25 The recently approved Banbury Gateway development was assessed on the basis of

the following trip rates for its proposed Restaurant uses.

Land Use Weekday PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Restaurants 2.524 2.524 1.257 0.571 Note: Trip rates are trips per 100 sq m development.

6.26 The Banbury Gateway scheme was approved on the assumption that 80% of the restaurant trips would be made by persons who were already on the site (i.e. 20% trips from origins not on the site).

6.27 In this case the same 20% new trips have been assumed. As in the case of the other

uses a 30% pass-by rate would be appropriate. The remaining trips have not all be assumed to be already visiting the rest of the proposed development (as was the case for the Banbury Gateway scheme). Instead these trips have been split between people already visiting the proposed development (and already being on the site) or visiting the Bicester Village or Tesco developments (and therefore resulting in a trip to the development site) in the following proportions. The total number of trips is such that different splits would not lead to materially different conclusions.



Trips Percentage of Total

New 20% Pass-By 30%

From Existing trips to proposed development 10% From Existing trips to Bicester Village 30% From Existing Trips to Tesco 10%

6.28 This leads to the effects shown in Table 6.1.

d. Gymnasium Trip Rates and Trip Types 6.29 We are not aware of any recently approved schemes incorporating a gym and have

therefore searched the TRICS database for this use. There is plenty of data for the weekday traffic generation of small fitness clubs but for Saturdays the data is limited. Private Gyms with floor areas up to 2500 sq m have therefore been searched for the weekday trip rates and up to 10,000 sq m and from 2001 onwards in the case of Saturdays in all parts of the UK excluding Greater London and Ireland / ROI. The database output is reproduced in Appendix B.

6.30 This search resulted in the following trip rates for the gym use.

Land Use Weekday PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Gym 3.433 1.977 0.773 0.869 Note: Trip rates are trips per 100 sq m development.

6.31 In the weekday pm peak hour it would be reasonable to assume that some of the

visits to the gym would be made by people travelling home from work. The usual 30% has been assumed although in reality, on a very busy road such as the A41 the pass-by trips could be a much higher rate. On a Saturday, for robustness it would seen reasonable to assume a lower rate and 10% has been assumed.

6.32 It would seem unlikely that a trip to the gym would be combined with a shopping

trip but such trips could be combined with the restaurant trips. For this assessment it has been assumed that 10% of the gym trips would be combined with restaurant trips. The remaining Gym trips have all been considered to be new trips whereas in reality some of these could be transferred from other gyms with a journey that includes the A41. This gives a further degree of robustness. These assumptions lead to the effects shown in Table 6.1



Table 6.1 Total Traffic Generation of Proposed Development Weekday PM Peak Hour 17.00 – 18.00 Arrivals Departures

New Shared Pass-By Trans- New Shared Pass-By Trans- Trips Trips Trips ferred Trips Trips Trips ferred

Trips Trips

Food 14 21 35 14 21 36 Non-Food 3 8 8 8 3 7 7 9 Restaurants 6 3 9 8 / 3 6 3 9 8 / 3 Gym 25 4 12 14 2 7 Saturday Peak Hour 12.00 – 13.00

Arrivals Departures

New Shared Pass-By Trans- New Shared Pass-By Trans- Trips Trips Trips ferred Trips Trips Trips ferred

Trips Trips

Food 10 15 24 11 16 26 Non-Food 8 24 24 23 7 20 20 22 Restaurants 3 2 5 4 / 1 1 1 2 2 / 1 Gym 7 1 1 8 1 1 Transferred trips = Trips Transferred from Bicester Village Transferred trips = Trips Transferred from Tesco

vi. Development Traffic Distribution Patterns and Traffic Effects a. Food Retail Trips

6.33 The food use is intended to serve the local population and not attract long distance

trips from outside Bicester. As such most of the food trips will originate from existing areas to the north and the new South West Bicester development to the west (whose access roads can also be used by other traffic from the western side of Bicester). For this assessment the routes to be followed have been assumed to be



used in the proportions below. As the total number of trips in this category is relatively low different assumptions would not lead to materially different effects.

Route Percentage of Total

Oxford Road North of A41 35% A41 East 15%

A41 South 15% From South West Bicester Site 35%

6.34 The Retail Assessment has concluded that the trade of the food use is likely to be

drawn from the following existing outlets:

Store / Centre Percentage of Total Transferred Trips

Bicester Town Centre 33% Tesco 22%

Other 45% 6.35 To provide a robust assessment it has been assumed that the trips currently being

made to the “Other” undefined stores / centres will all be new to the area of the proposed development whereas in reality some of these trips would be using the A41 in any event. The effects of the food trips would then be as shown in Figure 9 for the trips transferring from exiting stores in the town centre, Figure 10 for the trips transferring from trips being made to Tesco (ultimate larger store location assumed), and in Figure 11 for the trips transferred from the “Other” stores (all treated as new to the area of the proposed development).

6.36 The Pass-By trips have been distributed in proportion to the flows that will be

passing the site in the design year. This leads to the effects shown in Figure 12. b. Non-Food Retail Trips

6.37 As in the case of the proposed food use, the non-food use is intended to serve the

local population or people who are already visiting the Bicester Village retail outlet. The “New” trips are expected to come from the local surrounding population and would therefore follow the distribution pattern assumed for the food trips. This would lead to the effects shown in Figure 13.

6.38 The Retail Assessment has concluded that the trade of the non-food retail use is

likely to be drawn from the following existing outlets:



Store / Centre Percentage of Total Transferred Trips

Bicester Town Centre 1% Bicester Village Retail Outlet 3%

Banbury / Oxford 66% Aylesbury 9% Other Undefined 21%

6.39 Given the low total number of trips in this category (which would result in zero

trips transferring from Bicester town centre), the Bicester Town Centre and Bicester Village Retail Outlet trips have been combined. Assuming the same approach route assumptions as have been used for the food trips, the effects of trips transferring from Bicester Village would be as shown in Figure 14.

6.40 The trips transferring from trips currently being made to Oxford and Banbury

would be using the A41. The effects of these trips would therefore be as shown in Figure 15. Trips transferring from Aylesbury would use the A41 (east). The effects of these trips would therefore be as shown in Figure 16.


passing the site in the design year. This leads to the effects shown in Figure 17.

c. Restaurant Trips 6.42 The “New” restaurant trips are expected to come from the local surrounding

population. It is unlikely that anyone would drive from outside Bicester to solely dine at one of the proposed units. These trips would therefore follow the distribution pattern assumed for the food and non-food retail trips. This would lead to the effects shown in Figure 18.

6.43 Trips shared with trips being made to Bicester Village Retail Outlet and Tesco

would be as shown in Figures 19 and 20 respectively. For these figures it is assumed that people call at the restaurants upon completion of a visit to the other developments and then return to their original journey on completion of the visit.



d. Gym Trips 6.45 The new gym trips are expected to come from the local surrounding population.

These trips would therefore be expected to follow the distribution pattern assumed for the other uses new trips. This would lead to the effects shown in Figure 22.





vii. Total Effects of Development 6.47 Combining the various effects of the different proposed uses, the total combined

effect of the proposed development would be as shown in Figure 24.

viii. Design Traffic Flows 6.48 The total design traffic flows for the 2024 assessment are shown in Figure 25,

derived from the 2024 Base traffic Flows used in the Bicester Village Extension and New Tesco store application assessments (Figure 6), less the effects of the Employment development (included in Figure 6) that will be replaced by the proposed development (Figure 8) plus the effects of the development from Figure 24.

6.49 The total design flows for the 2017 tests are shown in Figure 26 derived by the

same process.

ix. Assessment of Effects of Development 6.50 Other than at the development site access the effects of the development would be

minimal. As can be seen from Figure 24, at other locations the increases in one turning movement tend to be countered by reductions in other movements. To assess the precise effects of the development the model used to assess the Bicester Village Extension and the new Tesco store has been replicated from the hardcopy model output provided in those scheme’s assessments. It is not known if this output was subsequently revised but the purpose here is to show the effects of the proposed development and a slightly different model would show the same effects.

6.51 In building this model it was noticed that on some two lane approaches, either both

lanes were defined as nearside lanes or offside lanes. Clearly only one lane can be the nearside lane and one the offside lane. This has therefore been corrected in the model used for this assessment.

6.52 The output does not indicate the link lengths used in the original model, only lane

lengths based on the number of vehicles they could store. Link lengths allowing for movements through the junctions are needed to ensure that the model accurately represents the progression of traffic through the network so all link lengths have been measured from scale drawings of the arrangements that will prevail following completion of the approved highway works that will be provided as part of the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco schemes.

6.53 The model has been used to assign traffic to the various lanes so that overall delay

is minimised. It is not known what process was used in the original model.



6.54 The highway works that will prevail following completion of the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco schemes are shown on Drawing No. 150302/05 a copy of which can be found in the Drawings section of this report. The model output is reproduced in Appendix C and summarised below. For comparison purposes the same cycle time that was used in the original modelling (98 sec. for both days) has been retained. In reality the optimum arrangements assuming traffic uses the lanes assumed in the model could result from different times. The model uses Passenger Car Units. The flow diagrams in the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco scheme assessments seemed to lose some vehicles in the conversion process. The flows used in the have therefore been derived from scratch in O-D matrix form and the process used can be seen in Appendix C.

6.55 As a result of the changes made and route assignment process adopted, the 2024

Base situation for the proposed development (the “with development” situation for the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco scheme assessment) is slightly different to the output from the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco schemes. The overall conclusions are, however, the same. There would be ample reserve capacity at the Pingle Drive and A41 roundabouts and at the site access. The new Tesco access would be operating with little reserve capacity but this is on the basis of the traffic flows that have been assigned to the two lane approached on the basis of delays considering the total network being modelled. This results in some two lane sections having significantly more traffic in one lane than the other and the traffic signal timings are based on accommodating the highest flows. In reality some traffic is likely to switch lanes knowing from experience that at this one junction it is better to be in a certain lane. With more balanced lane use there would be more reserve capacity.

6.56 The proposed development would not have a material effect on the situation that

will prevail in any event when the already approved schemes are implemented. In fact there would be a slight improvement in both the weekday pm and Saturday peak hour scenarios at the new Tesco access as a result of some traffic being drawn from the Tesco site to the foodstore in the proposed development and in the case of the weekday pm peak period, the high departures traffic generating employment use being replaced by the proposed development.

Junction Maximum Degree of Saturation Weekday PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Without With Without With Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Development Development Development Development Bicester Village / Pingle Drive 67.6% 65.1% 61.6% 59.3% A41 / Esso Roundabout 81.4% 79.0% 76.2% 79.9% New Tesco Access 93.8% 93.6% 84.8% 82.9% Site Access 83.8% 83.9% 65.0% 75.5%



6.57 The proposed development will not have any materially adverse effects, and in some cases a beneficial effect, on the traffic situation in this area.

6.58 The above assessment is based on the highway alterations agreed for the Bicester

Village Extension and New Tesco store being implemented. It is likely that these improvements will be completed by the time the proposed development is fully operational. As a sensitivity test, however, the existing highway arrangements have been assessed with and without the proposed development and the existing Bicester Village / Tesco traffic.

6.59 The main sources of concern at the present time are the A41 / Esso Roundabout and

the Oxford Road / Pingle Drive Roundabout. These have therefore been assessed as standard roundabouts under the 2017 with and without development traffic flows. The main cause of congestion in this area at the present time is the situation within the existing Bicester Village / Tesco site where traffic having left the highway network can com to a halt as drivers slow down looking fr parking space.

6.60 This is impossible to model (indeed no attempt was made to allow for this in the

approved Bicester Village Extension assessment) so the output from this test may not be representative of the situation that can prevail at times “on the ground” but we are interested in the relative performances of the two roundabouts with and without the proposed development, and the computer assessments should be reliable for such comparisons.

a. Pre-Improvement Assessment A41 / Esso Roundabout

6.61 This roundabout has been assessed under its current layout with the segregated left

turn slip road from the A41 East to the A41 South (which means the flow using this lane does not come into the roundabout assessment) using the Department of Transport Roundabout Assessment program ARCADY. The ARCADY results are reproduced in Appendix D and summarised below.

Junction Arm Without Development With Development Max RFC Queue Max RFC Queue Weekday PM Peak Hour Oxford Road North 60.1% 1.5 59.7% 1.5 A41 East 18.1% 0.2 18.0% 0.2 A41 South 71.7% 2.5 68.1% 2.1 Esso Access 16.7% 0.2 15.3% 0.2 Saturday Peak Hour Oxford Road North 47.6% 0.9 48.3% 0.9 A41 East 32.4% 0.5 32.4% 0.5 A41 South 65.1% 1.9 65.6% 1.9 Esso Access 15.0% 0.2 15.1% 0.2



6.62 As can be seen the effects of the development will be un-noticeable whatever the situation may be “on the ground”.

b. Pre-Improvement Assessment Oxford Road / Pingle Drive Roundabout

6.63 This roundabout has also been assessed under its current layout using the

Department of Transport Roundabout Assessment program ARCADY. The ARCADY results are reproduced in Appendix E and summarised below.

Junction Arm Without Development With Development Max RFC Queue Max RFC Queue Weekday PM Peak Hour Oxford Road North 38.1% 0.6 38.9% 0.6 Pingle Drive 30.5% 0.4 30.9% 0.4 Oxford Road South 56.7% 1.3 54.6% 1.2 Saturday Peak Hour Oxford Road North 42.4% 0.7 42.9% 0.7 Pingle Drive 30.0% 0.4 30.1% 0.4 Oxford Road South 57.6% 1.4 58.0% 1.4 6.64 As can be seen the effects of the development will be un-noticeable (or even an

improvement on the Oxford Road South entry to the roundabout in the pm peak hour) whatever the situation may be “on the ground”.

6.65 Even if the highway improvement scheme to be provided as part of the approved

Bicester Village Extension / New Tesco store were to be delayed, therefore. The proposed development could still be implemented with either no worsening of, or even an improvement to, the existing situation. x. Parking Demand and Provision

6.66 The current trend is to provide parking facilities which meet the needs of a

proposed development without providing an over-provision which could encourage use of the motor car for trips which can be made by other modes of transport.

6.67 The local planning authority parking standards indicate the maximum level of

parking provision that should be permitted for new development. For the different land uses these are :

Food Retail 1 space per 14 sq m Non-Food Retail 1 space per 20 sq m Restaurants 1 space per 5 sq m Public Area Leisure Uses 1 space per 22 sq m



6.68 Assuming that the public areas of the restaurants is around 60 % of the gross area this would give the following maximum levels of parking provision

Food Retail 929 sq m 66 spaces Non-Food Retail 6994 sq m (inc mezzanines) 349 spaces Restaurants 60% of 1168 = 700 sq m 140 spaces Leisure Uses 1185 sq m 54 spaces

6.69 In total, therefore the Cherwell parking standards would allow up to 609 parking

spaces on the site. The above calculations are not, however realistic and do not indicate the likely parking needs of the development. It has previously been agreed with the highway authority that mezzanine levels in retail developments do not generate traffic at the same rates as ground level floor space. With less arrivals and departures per sq m the parking demand will also be less. The leisure use standard is also a “catch all” category and could not be considered to be particularly relevant to a gym.

6.70 The proposed development will provide 263 parking spaces and so would clearly

be in accordance with the maximum parking standard. Will however, this level of provision be sufficient for the needs of the development ?

6.71 To determine the actual parking needs of the development the likely arrivals and

departures each use on the site is expected to generate throughout the day have been considered. Assuming the car park is empty at the start of the day this running total gives the accumulation of vehicles within the site each hour by hour and, therefore, the number of vehicles that would be expected to need parking.

6.72 In reality this process gives the “dynamic” parking demand as it includes vehicles

that are on route to or from parking spaces. The actual “static” parking demand can usually be considered to be around 10% less than the “dynamic” demand. For robustness, however, we have set out the dynamic demand of the proposed development and it can be taken that the actual number of spaces that would be occupied would be around 10% less than the calculated figures.

6.73 The expected arrivals and departures generated by each use has been calculated

from the trip rates that have previously been accepted by the Highway Authority plus the rates which are new to this exercise for the gym use (Appendix B).

6.74 These rates and the floor areas results in the accumulation of vehicles within the

site as shown in Appendix F. The situation during the week and on a Saturday has been considered. As can be seen the maximum parking demand would be for around 106 spaces in the week and around 151 spaces on a Saturday.

6.75 The proposed 263 spaces will clearly be able to meet the demands of the

development with plenty of spare capacity to accommodate seasonal variations in the parking demand.



xi. Parking Strategy and Management 6.76 The proposed development is intended to cater for local peoples needs and whilst

people visiting the Bicester Village development would be welcome to call at the site on leaving the area, (and by using trip rates where this was likely to happen at the sites surveyed this activity has been allowed for in the calculations), the main aim is to provide a foodstore and shops / restaurants that local people can use.

6.77 The parking demand calculations above show that the proposed parking will be

more than adequate to meet the development’s parking needs. For visitors to the Bicester Village Retail Outlet that chose not to use the Park and Ride facilities, the proposed development site will provide the first car park that visitors to Bicester Village will pass and be within easy walking distance of the Village.

6.78 There is the potential, therefore, at times when parking within the Bicester Village

site is at capacity, for drivers seeing a queue ahead of them to decide to park on the proposed development’s car park and walk the remaining distance. This would meant that he proposed developments car park was not being used for the development’s, and local peoples needs.

6.79 There will therefore need to be a car park management strategy implemented from

the first opening of the car park. It is likely that that this will need to be varied as the scheme develops and patterns “settle down”. Initially, however, we would envisage that as 2 hour maximum stay policy would be operated and enforced through an Automatic Number Plate Recognition system (ANPR). If use of the site reveals that this is not enough time to shop at the retail units (or have a gym workout) and then to have a meal this will be varied but kept at the shortest practical time.

6.80 To avoid the problems that have been associated with ANPR systems where tickets

are automatically issued to the vehicle’s registered owners for a stay only slightly over the maximum length of stay, we would envisage that the management of the development would work with the ANPR system operators to input a “human element” and have a letter sent where there was only a slight over-stay, advising drivers of the maximum length of stay instead a breach of contract penalty fine. The vehicle details would be recorded and if this became a regular occurrence a stronger warning letter would be issued and if that failed then a charge notice would be issued.

6.81 Where a vehicle stayed for more than this slight over-stay period the system would

determine the address of the registered vehicle and if this was in Bicester (and therefore a local user) a warning letter would be issued as opposed to the charge. Only if there was regular miss-use of the parking facilities by a local person would we expect a charge to be issued.



6.82 With the ability to “tailor” the system as it operates, this system should ensure that there is plenty of parking on the site for local people use and that slight discretions do not result in a charge notice being sent to the vehicle’s owner’s address.

xii. Servicing and Service Vehicle Manoeuvres

6.83 The foodstore and retail units will be services from a dedicated service area access

from the Service Station access from the A41 roundabout. This is already used by commercial traffic.

6.84 Plots of the swept path of a maximum size Articulated HGV arriving and reversing

to the rear of each unit with access to the service area, and then leaving are shown of Drawings 150203-02 and 150203-03 in Appendix G. As can be seen all three units could be serviced even if there was a vehicle being unloaded at the other units.

6.85 Restaurants within the car parks of retail developments are usually service from the

car park with the vehicles either using parking spaces that have been coned off or standing in the car park aisles. In this instance a service lay-by is proposed at the rear of the units which would be accessed from the existing SWB development access road. To reach this lay-by without using long sections of the SWN access roads the delivery vehicles would drive through the car park (but not stop to unload whilst doing so).

6.86 This type of restaurant unit is serviced usually only with light to medium size

vehicles. The car park has been designed to accommodate full size rigid HGV’s with space for other car park users to pass on bends etc. A plot of such a vehicle passing through the car park is shown on Drawing 150203-04 in Appendix G.

6.87 In order to crate the rear service lay-by the bus stop that has been provided on this

section of the access road (but not currently in use) will need to be relocated slightly as shown on the proposed highway works drawing.

xiii. Road Safety

6.88 The recorded Road Traffic Accidents in the vicinity of the site have been fully

assessed in the Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco scheme assessments. There were no locations where there had been any pattern of accidents that would be affected by the significant increase in traffic that these two developments would generate.

6.89 There have been no recorded accidents at the proposed development’s site access

but this has only been in use for a short period with limited traffic use. 6.90 The effects of the proposed development will be just a fraction of the effects of the

Bicester Village Extension and new Tesco store and using an access that has already been implemented should result in no highway safety concerns.



. xiv. Construction Issues 6.91 At this stage it is impossible to state exactly how the development will be

constructed. Meaningful information will only be available when a contractor has been appointed. The site does, however, benefit from an existing access that has in the past been used by commercial vehicles associated with the building of the Hotel, and will be used for the building of parts of the remaining SWB development. The site can also be accessed from the services access off the A41 roundabout.

6.92 There would be no necessity to crate any temporary access from the A41.

6.93 It is suggested that all that is required at this stage is a planning condition requiring a Construction Management Plan to be submitted before development that would generate construction traffic commences



7. Pedal Cycle Accessibility 7.1 National Cycle Route 51 passes directly past the site on the eastern side of the A41. 7.2 The new access to be created for the Tesco store will provide crossing facilities

which can either be used by cyclist’s dismounting or be of the “Toucan” pedestrian / cycle arrangement.

7.3 The new footway to be provided as part of the proposed development from the

Tesco access to the development site could be indicated for shared pedestrian / cycle use if desired by the Highway Authority.

7.4 This and other cycle routes in the area are shown in Figure 27. 7.5 Within the site secure cycle parking facilities will be provided to encourage this

mode of transport for small shopping trips. Staff will be further encouraged to use cycles as an alternative to the car through the provision of secure long stay cycle parking facilities and lockers.

7.6 It is usual to assume a maximum cycle distance of 5 km for shopping trips and

employment trips. Assuming a total cycle distance of 5 km (i.e. 2.5 km each way) for shopping trips gives the cycling catchment area indicated in Figure 28. As can be seen virtually the whole of Bicester would be within easy cycling distance of the development site.

7.7 For employment trips it would be reasonable to assume a 5 km distance each way.

Such a catchment area would be as shown in Figure 29. Cycling would clearly be an appropriate form of travel from a wide surrounding area for employment trips.

7.8 The site is clearly accessible by this mode of transport and the development will

encourage this mode for shopping and employment trips as an alternative to the car.



8. Conclusions 8.1 The site is within easy walking distance of a wide surrounding catchment area. 8.2 New pedestrian facilities will be provided as part of the development. With these

facilities the proposed development will be accessible on foot and will encourage walking as a mode of transport for small shopping trips.

8.3 The proposed site access arrangements will function satisfactorily with

considerable reserve capacity. The effects on the highway network beyond the site access will be minimal, in many locations negligible, and in some case result in an improvement in the conditions that would otherwise prevail if the already approved employment development on the site were to be implemented.

8.4 The parking facilities to be provided will meet the needs of the development and be

in accordance with national planning guidance. A Parking Management Strategy will be developed to ensure the parking facilities will be available for local people and not become an over-spill facility for the Bicester Village Retail Outlet.

8.5 The site has good public transport connections to the surrounding area with

frequent services directly passing the site. Bus stops will be provided directly outside the development site on the internal access road.

8.6 The site is directly adjacent to the National and Bicester Cycle network. Within the

site secure cycle parking facilities will be provided to encourage this mode of transport for small shopping trips and staff will be further encouraged to use cycles as an alternative to the car.

8.7 There is a large area of predominantly residential development within easy cycling

distance of the development site. The site is clearly accessible by this mode of transport and the development will encourage this mode for shopping and employment trips as an alternative to the car.

8.8 It is concluded that the site is accessible by a choice of modes of transport and that

there are no highways / traffic related reasons why the proposed development should not be approved.



Figures

N

SOUTH WEST BICESTERDEVELOPMENT SITE

PROPOSEDDEVELOPMENT SITE

Job TitleTurner Lowe Associates

DEVELOPMENT SITE

Proposed Mixed Development

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Site LocationDrawing Title

Client

Turner Lowe Associates22 Guest Road. Manchester. M25 3DLTel: 0161 798 7898 Fax: 0161 798 6642E-mail: [email protected]

N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 1

Feb 2015

Consolidated Properties

p pBicester Gateway. Bicester

150203

N

Bus Stops

PedestrianCrossingFacility

PedestrianCrossingFacilities

NationalCycle

Network

EXISTINGTESCO

BICESTER

SERVICES

SITE

PROPOSEDTESCO

VILLAGERETAILOUTLET

NationalCycle

Network

Bus Stops

TESCO

Pedestrian

Proposed Extension To National Cycle Network

Job TitleTurner Lowe Associates Proposed Mixed Development

PedestrianCrossingFacilities

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Surrounding Highway DetailsDrawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 2

N.T.S.

150203

Feb 2015



N

SOUTH WEST BICESTERSOUTH WEST BICESTERDEVELOPMENT SITE

SITE


1 km Walking Catchment Area

800 m Walking Catchment Area


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Shopping Walking Catchment Area

Drawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 3

N.T.S.

150203

Feb 2015



N

SOUTH WEST BICESTERDEVELOPMENT SITE

SITE


2 km Walking Catchment Area


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Employment Walking Catchment Area

Drawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 4

N.T.S. Feb 2015

150203



SITE


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Bicester Bus RoutesDrawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 5

N.T.S. Feb 2015

150203



N OXFORDROAD

806

(0.

7%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

145

(6.

2%) N OXFORD

ROAD

683

(1.

2%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

186

(4.

3%)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

90 (7.8%)

476 (0.4%)

.8%

) 1

345

(0%

)

196

0.8%

)

0.2%

)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

178 (0%)

414 (0%)

(0%

)

716

(0%

)

788

0.8%

)

.9%

)

A41 EAST

PETROLFILLINGSTATION

25

(0

144 (2.8%)

30 (0%)

867 (3 8%)

(0%) 54

(0%) 32

(0%) 58

(0

848

(0

403

(0

A41 EAST


30

(0

235 (0.9%)

76 (0%)

902 (1 4%)

(0%) 44

(0%) 27

(1.5%) 67 850

(0

209

(1

(4.1

%)

9

46

867 (3.8%)

(0.5

%)

133

2

(0%

)

3

0

407

(0

%)

1362

(2

.9%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(1.6

%)

7

57

902 (1.4%)

(0.8

%)

119

6

(1.6

%)

64

460

(0

%)

1337

(1

.5%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(0%

)

130

(2.8

%)

162

3

685 (0%)

300 (0%)

58

(0%

)

03

(2.7

%)

ACCESS(0

%)

1

30

(1.4

%)

156

6

455 (0%)

130 (0%)

80

(0%

)

86

(1.4

%)

ACCESS

Keyxx Total Vehs(xx) % HGV’s

1593

SITEACCESS

176

1

150

(0%) 161

(0%) 155

623

SITEACCESS

60

8

138

(0%) 73

(0%) 54


Figure 6a 2024 Traffic Flows With BicesterVillage Extension and New TescoWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

(2.8

%)

1

(0%

)

Figure 6b 2024 Traffic Flows With BicesterVillage Extension and New TescoSaturday 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH(1.4

%)

1

(0%

)

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 6

2024 Traffic Flows With Bicester VillageExtension and New Tesco


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

743

(0.

7%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

145

(6.

2%) N OXFORD

ROAD

621

(1.

1%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

186

(4.

3%)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

90 (7.8%)

476 (0.4%)

.8%

) 1

253

(0%

)

196

0.7%

)

0.3%

)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

178 (0%)

414 (0%)

(0%

)

659

(0%

)

788

0.8%

)

.5%

)

A41 EAST


22

(0

137 (2.2%)

27 (0%)

812 (3 7%)

(0%) 49

(0%) 29

(0%) 53

(0

807

(0

384

(0

A41 EAST


27

(0

227 (0.9%)

69 (0%)

840 (1 4%)

(0%) 44

(0%) 27

(1.5%) 67 799

(0

201

(1

(3.9

%)

8

96

812 (3.7%)

(0.5

%)

125

1

(0%

)

2

7

407

(0

%)

1260

(2

.9%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(1.6

%)

7

05

840 (1.4%)

(0.7

%)

115

2

(1.7

%)

58

460

(0

%)

1220

(1

.5%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(0%

)

130

(2.8

%)

149

0

685 (0%)

300 (0%)

58

(0%

)

02

(2.6

%)

ACCESS(0

%)

1

30

(1.4

%)

146

2

455 (0%)

130 (0%)

80

(0%

)

69

(1.4

%)

ACCESS

1460

SITEACCESS

176

1

140

(0%) 161

(0%) 155

519

SITEACCESS

60

8

126

(0%) 73

(0%) 54Keyxx Total Vehs(xx) % HGV’s


Figure 7a 2017 Traffic Flows With BicesterVillage Extension and New TescoWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

(2.8

%)

1

(0%

)

Figure 7b 2017 Traffic Flows With BicesterVillage Extension and New TescoSaturday 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH(1.3

%)

1

(0%

)

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 7

2017 Traffic Flows With Bicester VillageExtension and New Tesco


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

10 PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTERBICESTER VILLAGE

64A41 EAST


512

STATION

71

5

64

15 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

5

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

9

135

All Flows InPassengerCar Units(PCU’s)

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

9

1 5

135

79

9


Figure 8 Effects of Approved Development To Be Replaced By Proposed DevelopmentWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 8

Effects of Approved Development to beReplaced By Proposed Development


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

4 –

2 -

2

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

3 –

1 -

1

PINGLEDRIVE /


4 –

2 -

2BICESTER VILLAGE

3 –

1 -

1

A41 EAST


-2

2

4 -

2

-2

A41 EAST


-1

1

3 -

1

-1

2

2

4 -

2

6 -

2

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1

1

3 -

1

4 -

1

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

4

4

6 -

2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

3

4

4 -

1


OXFORD-2

SITEACCESS

2

6 -2

6

2

4

OXFORD-1

SITEACCESS

1

4 -1

4

1

4


Figure 9a Effects of Food Trips Transferring from Bicester Town CentreWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 9b Effects of Food Trips Transferring from Bicester Town CentreSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 9

Effects of Food Trips TransferringFrom Bicester Town Centre


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


4 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

2 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

-4 -2

-3

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

3

3

4

-2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

2

3

-4

-4

-4

-3

-3

-3


OXFORD-1

SITEACCESS

1

4 -1

4 - 3

2

3

OXFORD-1

SITEACCESS

1

2 -1

3 - 3

1

2


Figure 10a Effects of Food Trips Transferring from TescoWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 10b Effects of Food Trips Transferring from TescoSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 10

Effects of Food Trips Transferring From Tesco


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

6 4

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

6 4

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


6

2

4

2

8 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

6 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

2

6 2

2

4 2

8

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

6

6

8

6

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

3

4

6


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2

8

8

2

6

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2

6

6

2

4


Figure 11a Effects of Food Trips Transferring from Other Stores / LocationsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 11b Effects of Food Trips Transferring from Other Stores / LocationsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 11

Effects of Food Trips TransferringFrom Other Stores / Locations


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

0

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

7

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

0 7


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

11

10

11

10

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

8

7

8

8

-11

-1

-8

-


Figure 12a Effects of Food Pass-By TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 12b Effects of Food Pass-By TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

-

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 12

Effects of Food Pass-By Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

6 4

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

6 4

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


1

1

3

1

2 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

4 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1

1 1

1

3 1ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

1

2

4

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

3

2

4


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2

2

1

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1

4

4

1

2


Figure 13a Effects of New Non-Food TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 13b Effects of New Non-Food TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 13

Effects of New Non-Food Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

1 -1 1 -1

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

1

-1

1

-1

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


1 1

1 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1 1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1

1

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1


Figure 14a Effects of Non-Food Trips Transferring From Bicester VillageWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 14b Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From Bicester VillageSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 14

Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From Bicester Village


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

3

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

8

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

3

5

85


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

-33

-2

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

8

8

2 -

5

3

-3

3

1 - 5

-85

-8-3


Figure 15a Effects of Non-Food Trips Transferring From Oxford / BanburyWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 15b Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From Oxford / BanburySaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

2

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 15

Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From Oxford / Banbury


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


1 -1

- 1

- 1 1

3 -3

1 1

- 3

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

4 -

1

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1 -

1

-11

1

-2

-1 1 - 13

1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

4

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

2

2

1 -

1

3 -2

-1

1


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1 -

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

4

3 - 2

1

1 - 1

1 2

-1

-


Figure 16a Effects of Non-Food Trips Transferring From AylesburyWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 16b Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From AylesburySaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 16

Effects of Non-Food TripsTransferring From Aylesbury


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

-1 -1

4

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

4 12

-2


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

4

4

4

3

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

12

1

10

10

-4

-4

-12

-1


Figure 17a Effects of Non-Food Pass-By TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 17b Effects of Non-Food Pass-By TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

-

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 17

Effects of Non-Food Pass-By Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

2 1

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

2 1

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


2

1

1

1

3 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

2 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

1

2 1

1

1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

2

3

2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1 1


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

3

3

2

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2

1

1

1


Figure 18a Effects of New Restaurant TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 18b Effects of New Restaurant TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

1

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 18

Effects of New Restaurant Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

1 -1

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

3

-3

1

-2

3 2

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


3 +

1

2 +

1

-1 -1

3 +

1

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

2 +

1

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

3 1 1 1

+ 1

+ 1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS 3

+ 1

+ 1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1 +

1

1

3


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

3 +

3 + 1

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2 +

1 + 1

3 +

3 +

1 +

-1

1

2 +

1 +

1


Figure 19a Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Bicester Village TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 19b Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Bicester Village TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 19

Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Bicester Village Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESSACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

1

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

1

-2

1

2

-1

1


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

2

2

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1

2 +

1

1


Figure 20a Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Tesco TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 20b Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Tesco TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 20

Effects of Restaurant Trips SharedWith Tesco Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

-1 -1

4

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

4 2

-2


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

5

4

5

4

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

3

2

1

1

-5

-4

-3

-


Figure 21a Effects of Restaurant Pass-By TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 21b Effects of Restaurant Pass-By TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 21

Effects of Restaurant Pass-By Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

9 2

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

5 1

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


9

4

3

1

13 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

4 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

4

5 2

1

3 1

3

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

9

5

7

4

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

2 4

3


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

13

7

5

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

4

4

3

2

1

3

1


Figure 22a Effects of New Gym TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 22b Effects of New Gym TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 22

Effects of New Gym Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /


BICESTER VILLAGE

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

-1 -1

6

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

6

-2


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

6

6

4

3

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

1

1

-6

-6

-1


Figure 23a Effects of Gym Pass-By TripsWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 23b Effects of Gym Pass-By TripsSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 23

Effects of Gym Pass-By Trips


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

N OXFORDROAD

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

19 -1 13 -2

BICESTER VILLAGE

BICESTER VILLAGE

-4

3

17

-3

2

12

A41 EAST


A41 EAST


26 -4

- 3

9

20 -5

5

- 4

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

28 TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

39

7

20

9

1

5

16

-4 -2

8

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

39

8

ACCESS

INTERNALACCESSROADS

29

22

26

33 21

32

- 6

-2

-4

1

-3

-2

- 4


OXFORD

SITEACCESS

68

OXFORD

SITEACCESS

5

52

19

61

29 26

-34

-3-3

28

32 -32

21


Figure 24a Total Effects of DevelopmentWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

Figure 24b Total Effects of DevelopmentSaturdays 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

-

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 24

Total Effects of Development


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

815

(0.

7%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

144

(6.

2%) N OXFORD

ROAD

696

(1.

2%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

184

(4.

3%)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

86 (7.8%)

479 (0.4%)

.8%

) 1

298

(0%

)

196

0.8%

)

0.2%

)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

175 (0%)

416 (0%)

(0%

)

728

(0%

)

788

0.8%

)

.9%

)

A41 EAST


25

(0

141 (2.8%)

30 (0%)

871 (3 8%)

(0%) 54

(0%) 32

(0%) 58

(0

862

(0

399

(0

A41 EAST


30

(0

231 (0.9%)

76 (0%)

907 (1 4%)

(0%) 44

(0%) 27

(1.5%) 67 870

(0

209

(1

(4.5

%)

8

82

871 (3.8%)

(0.5

%)

128

8

(0%

)

3

0

403

(0

%)

1386

(2

.9%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(1.6

%)

7

58

907 (1.4%)

(0.8

%)

121

2

(1.6

%)

64

458

(0

%)

1365

(1

.5%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(0%

)

126

(2.9

%)

152

1

679 (0%)

298 (0%)

11

(0%

)

72

(2.8

%)

ACCESS(0

%)

1

27

(1.4

%)

158

7

451 (0%)

128 (0%)

38

(0%

)

54

(1.5

%)

ACCESS

Keyxx Total Vehs(xx) % HGV’s

1561

SITEACCESS

199

2

147

(0%) 87

(0%) 104

589

SITEACCESS

79

13 135

(0%) 25

(0%) 75


Figure 25a Total 2024 Traffic Flows WithProposed DevelopmentWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

(2.9

%)

1

(0%

)

Figure 25b Total 2024 Traffic Flows WithProposed DevelopmentSaturday 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH(1.5

%)

1

(0%

)

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 25

Total 2024 Traffic Flows WithProposed Development


Feb 2015


150203

N OXFORDROAD

752

(0.

7%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

144

(6.

2%) N OXFORD

ROAD

634

(1.

0%)

PINGLEDRIVE /

BICESTER

184

(4.

3%)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

86 (7.8%)

479 (0.4%)

.8%

) 1

206

(0%

)

196

0.7%

)

0.3%

)

BICESTER VILLAGE

0%)

175 (0%)

416 (0%)

(0%

)

671

(0%

)

788

0.7%

)

.5%

)

A41 EAST


22

(0

134 (2.2%)

27 (0%)

816 (3 7%)

(0%) 49

(0%) 29

(0%) 53

(0

821

(0

380

(0

A41 EAST


27

(0

223 (0.9%)

69 (0%)

845 (1 4%)

(0%) 44

(0%) 27

(1.5%) 67 819

(0

196

(1

(4.2

%)

8

32

816 (3.7%)

(0.5

%)

120

7

(0%

)

2

7

403

(0

%)

1284

(2

.9%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(1.6

%)

7

06

845 (1.4%)

(0.7

%)

116

8

(1.7

%)

58

458

(0

%)

1248

(1

.4%

)

TESCO /BUSINESS

PARKACCESS

(0%

)

126

(3.0

%)

138

8

679 (0%)

298 (0%)

11

(0%

)

71

(2.6

%)

ACCESS(0

%)

1

27

(1.3

%)

148

3

451 (0%)

128 (0%)

38

(0%

)

37

(1.5

%)

ACCESS

1428

SITEACCESS

199

2

137

(0%) 87

(0%) 104

485

SITEACCESS

79

13

123

(0%) 125

(0%) 75Keyxx Total Vehs(xx) % HGV’s


Figure 26a Total 2017 Traffic Flows WithProposed DevelopmentWeekdays 17.00 – 18.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH

(2.9

%)

1

(0%

)

Figure 26b Total 2017 Traffic Flows WithProposed DevelopmentSaturday 12.00 – 13.00

OXFORDROAD

A41 SOUTH(1.3

%)

1

(0%

)

Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

DrawingTitle

Client


N.T.S.

J.L.

Figure 26

Total 2017 Traffic Flows WithProposed Development


Feb 2015


150203

N

SITE


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Cycle FacilitiesDrawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 27

N.T.S. Feb 2015



150203

N

SITE


2.5 km Shopping Cycling Catchment Area


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Shopping Trip Cycle Catchment AreaDrawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 28

N.T.S. Feb 2015



150203

N

SITE


5 km Employment Cycling Catchment Area


Job No.

Drawn By

Scale

Drg. No.

Checked

Date Doc Sheet No.

Approved

Rev.

Employment Trip Cycle Catchment AreaDrawing Title

Client


J.L.

Figure 29

N.T.S. Feb 2015



150203

Documents

PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT BICESTER GATEWAY …