Submissions on proposed Drive-Thru Outlet

21/02286/F

3 August 2021

Version 1.1

1. SUMMARY

BicesterBUG objects to the proposal in its current form. The provision

for active travel is insufficient and only token effort has been given

to enabling customers to access and use the site without a vehicle.

In particular, pedestrian and cycle friendly crossings to the

development over the arms of the roundabout should be provided.

These could include parallel crossings which are economical and

demand-sensitive. Parallel crossings could be provided on all arms to

create a so-called ‘Dutch’ roundabout. Segregated paths should be

provided on all desire lines to the development that comply with

Department for Transport Local Transport Note (‘LTN’) 1/20.

We note the incongruity of a vehicle centred drive thru coffee outlet

being proposed in Bicester when the Council has declared a climate

emergency, ambitious targets for active travel and while traffic issues

are increasing. This context makes the provision of high-quality

walking and cycling access more, not less, important in this case to

ensure high walking and cycling customer numbers.

Further engagement by BicesterBUG with the developers and

planning authority would be appreciated to enable the plans to

develop as recommended under LTN1/20.

2. COMMENTS

The current designs do not make it easy for pedestrians or cyclists to

access the proposed development. Access will be particularly difficult

for vulnerable users such as the elderly and disabled due to the

uncontrolled crossings and narrow shared paths. Active travel friendly

crossings over the arms of the roundabout such as parallel crossings

need to be provided to enable access. A ‘Dutch’ style roundabout with

crossings over each arm of the roundabout should be considered. In

addition, the roadside paths that link to the development are woefully

inadequate, do not comply with current standards, and need to be

constructed in accordance with LTN 1/20.

2.1 Pedestrian and Cycle Routes and Facilities

New cycling and walking infrastructure should comply with the LTN

1/20 Standards, including measures such as segregated off-road

cycle paths and priority for cycle tracks over minor roads. None of

these are proposed at present. The plans should also be compliant

with the 2020 OCC Local Walking and Cycling Plan (‘LCWIP’) for

Bicester, which the applicant makes no reference to.

There is currently only one tolerable crossing over the Skimmingdish

Lane, which is well away from the desire line and not well situated to

benefit this development. It also requires most users to cross other

arms of the roundabout where there are uncontrolled crossings. Most

visitors are in fact likely to approach from the opposite direction, the

industrial estate. Here there are a large number of units including

educational facilities that are occupied during the day. Visitors to the

proposed development would want to cross via the A4421 arm where

there is presently only an uncontrolled crossing. In the absence of

such provision, it is likely that visitors within a few hundred metres

of the proposed development will choose to drive to access it, thereby

choking the roads.

As confirmed by LTN 1/20, uncontrolled crossings will discourage the

overwhelming majority of users (Table 10-2). There are uncontrolled

crossings over the Launton Road arm; the A4421 arm; and the

entrance to the care home. In order to provide access, at a bare

minimum there needs to be active travel friendly crossings over the

arms of the roundabout such as parallel crossings. Ideally, crossings

should be provided over all arms to create a so-called ‘Dutch’

roundabout. This would provide a cost-effective and demandsensitive means of access that would cause little or no delay to

existing motor vehicles using the roundabout. It would also reduce

unnecessary traffic.

In addition, there are currently only very narrow, shared, paths in

the vicinity, and these are incomplete. In order to provide access, all

paths should be upgraded to segregated provision, and paths should

be provided along all the desire lines to enable pedestrian and cycle

access from all areas of Bicester.

The applicant’s Travel Plan suggest in Figure 1B that cycle access

should be via the ‘pedestrian access’ or via the road, both of which

would not be LTN1/20 compliant and put cyclists in conflict with

pedestrians or force them onto a potentially busy road. Cyclists

should be provided with a safe, segregated access point.

The bike parking is both insufficient and in an inconvenient place, it

has been located on the other side of the car park, almost as far from

the building as possible rather than directly adjacent as would be

most convenient. Providing 6 spaces, which are also not suitable for

non-standard bicycles (adapted, trikes, cargo bikes), is insufficient,

this has already been seen at other such outlets in Bicester where,

despite poor cycle access, customers and staff arrive by bike. A larger

number of secure cycle spaces, which also would accommodate a

diversity of cycles, should be provided.

2.2 Aspirations for Active Travel

Given the inadequate design, the proposal is inadequate to permit

the attainment of the policy goal of a 200% increase (tripling) of

cycling and a 50% increase in walking as committed to in the

Oxfordshire County Council (‘OCC’) LCWIP Bicester 2020.

In order to achieve these aspirations, a more ambitious plan for

walking and cycling is to be expected. The design would benefit from

the input of a designer with experience of riding in urban

environments and skills in active travel infrastructure, as per

Summary Principle 20 of LTN 1/20 ‘All designers of cycle schemes

must experience the roads as a cyclist.’ Furthermore, there has been

no engagement with cyclists or vulnerable users as required by LTN

1/20 (10.4.17). This would have highlighted the problems with the

design.

It is now a key requirement that active travel access to a

development is now a key criterion in planning terms. The

Department for Transport states: 'Cycling facilities should be

regarded as an essential component of the site access and any offsite highway improvements that may be necessary. Developments

that do not adequately make provision for cycling in their transport

proposals should not be approved. This may include some off-site

improvements along existing highways that serve the development.'

(LTN 1/20, 14.3.12). As such, the applicant should provide a

contribution towards upgrading the pedestrian and cycle routes into

Bicester town.

3. REFERENCES

EcoBicester Planning Standards

https://portal.oxfordshire.gov.uk/content/publicnet/other_sites/Eco

Bicester/standards.html

Cherwell Design Guide SPD (2017)

Oxfordshire County Council (2020), Local Walking and Cycling Plan

for Bicester

Department for Transport (2020), Local Transport Note 1/20