New car park for Banbury

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

At last, a proper purpose-built car park for Banbury, rather than lots of little ones and nowhere near enough spaces to cater properly for future demand.  Looks like the new car park will be positioned on the east side of the station with a new link bridge connecting it to the station, presumably attaching directly onto the existing footbridge leading to platform 1?

The end of a lease on land currently used for parking will mean that 376 spaces are set to be lost next summer, but is more than offset by the 707 spaces provided by the new car park.  There was also a bid for a 'temporary' 149 space car park submitted for land near the football stadium, but I'm unsure as to whether that is going ahead as well?

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Press-Releases/PASSENGERS-SET-TO-BENEFIT-FROM-BETTER-PARKING-FACILITIES-AT-STATIONS-1b33/SearchCategoryID-2.aspx

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/banbury-station-multi-storey-car-park-plans

http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/news/9810744.Banbury_multi_storey_car_park_bid_would_create_700_spaces/

[ChrisB]

Hmmm, don't believe all the hype.....

There is a lot of relevant objection from local (I Mean *very* local, as in across the not very wide access road) residents (both in traffic congestion on their road and local junction as well as a monstrosity across from their dwellings) - and neither are the tramway units currently leased and used as car parking, unrenewable. They wouldn't get a long-term lease granted, but 2-3 years is definitely obtainable - that area is not going to be redeveloped in this timescale.

The *real* reason that Chiltern want his project is as follows -

One of the original ideas several years ago was to relocate the Network Rail base in the current main car park across to the eastern side & utilise the then rectangular shape of this current car park for a multi-storey. Trouble was, Chiltern had to pay for it all at that stage, so it was quietly dropped and tramway units more cheaply leased. The plan for the new NR^» (Network Rail - home page) base was drawn up - I know the architect & the plans exist, so it got quite some way before it was dropped.

There is a franchise requirement of November 20, 2013 to provide this car park.

Hence it is now urgent. Chiltern have now obtained various grants for this work, meaning they haven't a penny to spend - but what's the betting that they'll still use the provision of this multi-storey as an excuse to put up Banbury fares more than RPI^▸ (Revenue Protection Inspector (or Retail Price Index, depending on the context))+1% within the basket of fares though?!!

Their proposal is the only project that might have met this franchise deadline - it would take too long to relocate NR and the two sidings - BUT, the old plan is still executable, but the grant funding won't relocate NR. BUT it *would* make far more sense to build the multi-storey within the current car park. No resident problems, and contains any congestion caused within the confines of the car park and access road.

However, because of the size and number of objections from both Councillors and residents, along with Highway authority objections to the congestion it will cause, the time it will take to adjust plans mean that consent is already behind their schedule to complete by the franchise date. Chiltern have admitted as much.

So, I'm hoping they'll give up on this scheme and go with the original idea using the grant funding to at least pay for the majority of the project - rather than have a fight with both local residents and the planning authority which won't endear them to either.

Of course, if they break a franchise commitment, we know what follows, don't we?

[IndustryInsider]

So, I'm hoping they'll give up on this scheme and go with the original idea using the grant funding to at least pay for the majority of the project - rather than have a fight with both local residents and the planning authority which won't endear them to either.

Yes, moving that NR^» (Network Rail - home page) centre would certainly be a better location for a 2 or 3 tier multi-storey car park than where they are talking about - presumably the two stabling sidings would also have to be moved southwards to where the old south goods yard used to be?  Sounds like a bit of an awkward situation that Chiltern find themselves in!

[ChrisB]

Indeed - but one of their own creation. They've known for years that the parking situation at Banbury needed sorting permanently & that the Tramway units were scheduled for a canal-side development demolition. Living on borrowed time never works for long.

The relocation of the heavily-used sidings is the reason they couldn't complete the multi-storey project on the current site within a year....

[gwr2006]

To Moderator, can this topic be moved to the 'Chiltern Railways Services' thread as they are the operator of Banbury Station. Thank you.

[ChrisB]

The application was recommended, as predicted, for refusal by Council Planning Officers. Highway authority (County Council) concerns over traffic congestion at a local junction together with the overbearing result on local residents are given as reasons for refusal.

At the Planning Committee meeting held last Thursday, the decision was deferred, to allow Chiltern to meet with both authorities on site to try and sort out the reasons for refusal.

Chiltern have offered a measley ^100k for road improvements - a sum that won't scratch the edge of the layout improvements necessary. And the overbearing aspect isn't sorted either - officers suggested they remove the top storey, something Chiltern say they can't do as the grant funding is for a 707 space car park.

I think this'll get messy before Chiltern give up on the Franchise deadline and design something more suitable.

[IndustryInsider]

I think this'll get messy before Chiltern give up on the Franchise deadline and design something more suitable.

Would they claim they tried their best (by submitting an application that was refused) and therefore avoid any penalties for breaking the franchise agreement?

[ChrisB]

Probably, knowing Chiltern.....:-)

But the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) might read this thread.....:-o

Chiltern, in my view, knew ages ago that they needed better car park arrangements at Banbury, but weren't inclined to spend their own money. Instead, they've spent a lot of time applying for various grants, and now find themselves out of time (even if this application does eventually curry favour) to build it within the deadline.

A self-inflicted problem, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion). The local User Group discussed a perfectly usable solution over two years ago, but as I said, they put it on the back-burner as it would cost money. Now they'll have to re-consider it, as its the only likely alternative to spending ^million+ on road improvements to get the current application past the planners - and they're likely to have to ditch one floor too.

I do have sympathy, but its limited. In the meantime, they'll have to temproary renew rental of current spaces that expire in August & October.

On a better note, for those that know the Banbury station area, I'm hearing that Chiltern have finally purchased the strip of land that runs from their station car park out to Tramway Road, which may assist in developing other plans. Fact yet to be confirmed direct with Chiltern though.

[ChrisB]

On a better note, for those that know the Banbury station area, I'm hearing that Chiltern have finally purchased the strip of land that runs from their station car park out to Tramway Road, which may assist in developing other plans. Fact yet to be confirmed direct with Chiltern though.

Fact turned out not to be true....

Meanwhile, Chiltern are going to discuss the Highway objections with them & the plan will return for Council determination on February 28.

[IndustryInsider]

The concerns are still there, but it looks like the multi-storey car park is still very much on the agenda having been passed as acceptable by Cherwell District Council.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-21613675

[ChrisB]

Indeed.

Banbury Town Council have it spot on though. While additional, permanent space IS required, the site chosen is NOT the place to locate it.

[swrural]

The problem is that if the CC highways had no objection, and the DC^▸ (Direct Current) officer does not consider it overlooks, then the chance of refusal is slim at committee.  The newspaper article is most confusing as it reports the meeting had taken place ('discussed.... earlier') but does not actually positively report the outcome.

I am afraid that what TCs^‡(resolve) and PCs think, often carries no real weight with planning officers, as they know the reality of the typical capability of these bodies to measure proposals against the Development Plan.     

[ChrisB]

Unfortunately, its often the TC^‡(resolve) or PC that has the local knowledge.

Its about time that planning regs forced the officers to consult *and take into account* the local view.

Also, in these circimstances where the Highways authority has done a complete volte-face, they should be compelled to produce a document detailing why, and what measures have been agred as conditions. The document in this case has few specifics

[swrural]

If it has been determined (I still could not see that from the article) then the p.a. has to state its reasons for approval, just as much as the reverse.  So the residents could see if they can spot a flaw.  It could, however, only be proved that the officer (and then committee) had not taken everything into account if the officer did not refer to their Objection (the TC^‡(resolve) is a statutory consultee) in his report.  He will have done though, I am certain.  So that's the 'taking into account' bit.

The TC has no recourse in that event other than requesting call-in or JR (as do the residents).  Otherwise, third party right of appeal is not allowed under present legislation.  The dice are thus loaded in favour of the developer, who can appeal if refused, and this Government (and the last) has shamefully ignored the request to allow third party appeals on planning grounds.

If everyone knew all this, my apologies.     

[Network SouthEast]

The Planners (21:00 tonight on BBC2 and BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) HD) provides a useful insight in to the planning process. Anyone that hasn't been following it, would do well to tune in and watch an episode as I think it gives a reasonable portrayal of the Planning Officers, applicants, objectors and the Committees themselves.