DOCSLIB.ORG

Residential Development Thorpe Park Leeds Travel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Residential Development Thorpe Park Leeds Travel Plan February, 2015 Prepared for: Scarborough Developments Ltd Prepared by: Travel Plan Services Ltd The Loft, Dearden Gallery Dearden Street Ossett Wakefield WF5 8NR Residential Development, Thorpe Park – Travel Plan – February 2015 Revision Record Revision File Ref. Date Prepared by Checked by Status - 420_20140910_Thorpe Park 10/09/2014 GS JPH Draft Residential – Travel Plan A 420_20150211_Thorpe Park 11/02/2015 GS JPH Draft Residential – Travel Plan B 420_20150211_Thorpe Park 10/03/2015 GS JPH Final Residential – Travel Plan Copyright Statement This report is the copyright of Travel Plan Services Ltd. The information, ideas and other intellectual property set out in this report and supporting technical appendices are the property of Travel Plan Services and are for the sole benefit of Scarborough Developments Ltd in respect of development proposals for the residential development at Thorpe Park. Travel Plan Services Ltd. requires that the information, ideas and other intellectual property set out in this report are: Not shared with third parties and particularly with direct or indirect competitors of Travel Plan Services Ltd; Not conveyed to other consultants or personnel without the prior approval of Travel Plan Services Ltd.; and Not copied in part or in whole. Residential Development, Thorpe Park – Travel Plan – February 2015 Contents Chapter Title Page 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 1 Developers Commitment to Travel Planning ................................................................. 2 The Travel Plan Vision .................................................................................................... 2 Travel Plan Aims and Objectives .................................................................................... 2 2. TRAVEL PLAN POLICY CONTEXT ...................................................................................... 4 What is a Travel Plan? .................................................................................................... 4 National Policy Context .................................................................................................. 4 Local Transport Policy ..................................................................................................... 5 3. THORPE PARK: A SUSTAINABLE & ACCESSIBLE DEVELOPMENT ..................................... 8 Proposed Development Context .................................................................................... 8 Site Access & Local Highway Network ............................................................................ 9 Parking .......................................................................................................................... 10 Active Travel Options ................................................................................................... 10 Public Transport ........................................................................................................... 12 4. LOCAL FACILITIES .......................................................................................................... 15 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 15 Education ...................................................................................................................... 15 Shopping ....................................................................................................................... 16 5. TRAVEL PLAN MEASURES ............................................................................................. 19 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 19 Travel Plan Management ............................................................................................. 19 Securing the Travel Plan ............................................................................................... 20 Travel Plan Budget/Mitigation ..................................................................................... 20 Travel Plan Marketing and Information Provision ....................................................... 20 Walking Specific Measures ........................................................................................... 22 Cycling Specific Measures............................................................................................. 23 Public Transport Specific Measures ............................................................................. 24 Sustainable Car Use Specific Measures ........................................................................ 24 6. TRAVEL PLAN TARGETS AND MONITORING ................................................................. 26 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 26 Travel Plan Targets ....................................................................................................... 26 Survey Format .............................................................................................................. 28 Residential Travel Plan Monitoring .............................................................................. 29 Monitoring Report ........................................................................................................ 30 7. SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 31 Residential Travel Plan ................................................................................................. 31 Residential Development, Thorpe Park – Travel Plan – February 2015 Appendices Appendix A Site Context Plan Appendix B Thorpe Park Masterplan Appendix C Bus Service Information Appendix D Thorpe Park Travel Guide Appendix E Action Plan Appendix F School Location/Access Plan Residential Development, Thorpe Park – Travel Plan – February 2015 1. INTRODUCTION Background 1.1 Travel Plan Services Ltd (TPS) has been commissioned by Scarborough Developments Ltd (‘the developer’) to prepare a Travel Plan (TP) for the proposed residential development at Thorpe Park, Leeds. The development will consist of a maximum of 300 homes, in a mixture of tenures and styles, on land bounded to the south by the Thorpe Park Business Park and to the north by the York - Leeds railway line. 1.2 Thorpe Park is an established business park which currently has around 550,000 sq ft of occupied floorspace, and an outline approval to significantly expand through the development of a mix of additional uses. The proposed residential development will sit on land which is currently earmarked for the development of B1 office floorspace within the approved masterplan, and as a result the overall mix of non-residential uses within the overall Thorpe Park masterplan will reduce. 1.3 When granting permission for the Thorpe Park masterplan a site wide Framework Travel Plan was secured [ref: 420_20130618_Thorpe Park FTP], which sets out how current travel plan activities at the site will be built upon as the site expands. Whilst paying due regard to that Framework Travel Plan, this Residential Travel Plan is being developed as a standalone strategy due to a recognition that the opportunities to promote sustainable travel within a residential context vary significantly to those within a workplace context. There is also potential that the residential development will be developed separately to the commercial site, if the site is sold to a residential developer. Preparation of a standalone Residential Travel Plan would allow that developer to implement the strategy directly if appropriate. It should be noted that any non-residential uses developed in the area shown as ‘Mixed Use’ on the masterplan will fall under the remit of the Framework Travel Plan (i.e. outside of the scope of this residential travel plan). 1.4 This TP has been developed to reflect the requirements of Leeds City Council's Travel Plans Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and the wider sustainable travel agenda. It is not an anti- car policy, rather a strategy for enabling residents to make informed travel choices by promoting the benefits of active travel modes and identifying appropriate measures to encourage their use. 1 Residential Development, Thorpe Park – Travel Plan – February 2015 Developers Commitment to Travel Planning 1.5 Travel plans can deliver a wide range of benefits to the developer, as well as to residents and the wider community. At the sales and marketing stage a proactive TP can assist a residential developer in promoting a site as an accessible and sustainable location to live, with a range of travel options available to prospective residents. This process enables prospective residents to make a fully informed decision when choosing to move to the site, taking into account the site location relative to sustainable travel options, and the knock on effect this may have upon reducing the need to use a car for regular or one off journeys. 1.6 The promotion of sustainable travel options from an early stage provides a cost effective mechanism by which developers can minimise the level of car based trips generated by a development,
Recommended publications
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2010 / Yorkshire and the Humber

    Heritage at Risk Register 2010 / Yorkshire and the Humber

    HERITAGE AT RISK 2010 / YORKSHIRE AND THE HUMBER Contents HERITAGE AT RISK 3 Reducing the risks 6 Publications and guidance 9 THE REGISTER 11 Content and assessment criteria 11 Key to the entries 13 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 16 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 41 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 41 North Lincolnshire (UA) 42 North Yorkshire 44 South Yorkshire 106 West Yorkshire 117 York (UA) 130 The Heritage at Risk Register helps us to identify the most threatened buildings, archaeological sites and landscapes in this most distinctive of English regions. For the 60% of listed buildings on this year’s Register that could have a sustainable future through commercial or residential reuse, the economic downturn has brought additional challenges to which we must now respond. This year, we undertook a pioneering 15% sample survey of England’s 14,500 listed places of worship to help us understand the condition of the thousands of designated churches, chapels, synagogues, mosques and temples and other faith buildings that are the spiritual focus for our communities. They face many different kinds of challenges and we need to ensure their future. In response to the expansion of asset types and changed Last year we included conservation areas in the Register economic conditions we have developed a new strategy. for the first time. This year, 46 of these, including Haworth, From now on we will focus our resources on types of Holbeck and Rotherham, are known to be at risk, site that make a particular contribution to the region’s but the survey of nearly 800 areas is proving a challenging character.
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2015, Yorkshire

    Heritage at Risk Register 2015, Yorkshire

    Yorkshire Register 2015 HERITAGE AT RISK 2015 / YORKSHIRE Contents Heritage at Risk III The Register VII Content and criteria VII Criteria for inclusion on the Register IX Reducing the risks XI Key statistics XIV Publications and guidance XV Key to the entries XVII Entries on the Register by local planning XIX authority Cumbria 1 Yorkshire Dales (NP) 1 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 1 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 23 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 23 North Lincolnshire (UA) 25 North Yorkshire 27 Craven 27 Hambleton 28 Harrogate 33 North York Moors (NP) 37 Richmondshire 45 Ryedale 48 Scarborough 64 Selby 67 Yorkshire Dales (NP) 71 South Yorkshire 74 Barnsley 74 Doncaster 76 Peak District (NP) 79 Rotherham 80 Sheffield 83 West Yorkshire 86 Bradford 86 Calderdale 91 Kirklees 96 Leeds 101 Wakefield 107 York (UA) 110 II Yorkshire Summary 2015 e have 694 entries on the 2015 Heritage at Risk Register for Yorkshire, making up 12.7% of the national total of 5,478 entries. The Register provides an Wannual snapshot of historic sites known to be at risk from neglect, decay or inappropriate development. Nationally, there are more barrows on the Register than any other type of site. The main risk to their survival is ploughing. The good news is that since 2014 we have reduced the number of barrows at risk by over 130, by working with owners and, in particular, Natural England to improve their management. This picture is repeated in Yorkshire, where the greatest concentration of barrows at risk is in the rich farmland of the Wolds.
  • English Heritage / Heritage at Risk Register 2012

    English Heritage / Heritage at Risk Register 2012

    HERITAGE AT RISK 2012 / YORKSHIRE AND THE HUMBER Contents HERITAGE AT RISK 3 Reducing the risks 7 Publications and guidance 10 THE REGISTER 12 Content and assessment criteria 12 Key to the entries 15 Heritage at risk entries by local planning authority 17 Cumbria 18 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 18 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 44 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 45 North Lincolnshire (UA) 46 North Yorkshire 49 South Yorkshire 108 West Yorkshire 121 York (UA) 141 It is heartening to see that the number of sites on the national Heritage at Risk Register continues to fall, despite the challenges of recession. 1,150 assets have been removed for positive reasons since the Register was launched in 2008.The sites that remain at risk tend to be the more intractable ones where solutions are taking longer to implement. Overall, the number of buildings at risk has fallen, although we are seeing a steady increase in the proportion of buildings on the Register that are capable of beneficial re-use.These have become vacant not because of any fundamental lack of potential, but as the temporary victims of the current economic climate. The average conservation deficit for buildings has increased as end-values have stagnated or fallen. We are now into the third year of our thematic Our Chair, Baroness Andrews, recently visited Joel’s Yard approach, which focuses on the most distinctive aspects in Sheffield to celebrate the completion of repairs and of Yorkshire’s heritage at risk.We have had another strong to announce a further grant of £300,000 for the adjacent year, removing 56 sites from the Register and offering North Yard.
  • Public Document Pack

    Public Document Pack

    Public Document Pack EAST (OUTER) AREA COMMITTEE Meeting to be held in Civic Hall, Leeds on Tuesday, 11th September, 2012 at 4.00 pm MEMBERSHIP Councillors S Armitage - Cross Gates and Whinmoor; P Grahame - Cross Gates and Whinmoor; P Gruen - Cross Gates and Whinmoor; M Dobson - Garforth and Swillington; A McKenna - Garforth and Swillington; T Murray - Garforth and Swillington; M Harland - Kippax and Methley; J Lewis - Kippax and Methley; K Wakefield - Kippax and Methley; J Cummins - Temple Newsam; M Lyons - Temple Newsam; K Mitchell - Temple Newsam; Agenda compiled by: South East Area Leader: Angela Bloor Shaid Mahmood Governance Services Unit Tel: 22 43973 Civic Hall LEEDS LS1 1UR Tel: 24 74754 Produced on Recycled Paper A A G E N D A Item Ward/ Item Not Page No Open No 1 APPEALS AGAINST REFU SAL OF INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 25* of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded). (*In accordance with Procedure Rule 25, written notice of an appeal must be received by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting.) 2 EXEMPT INFORMATION - POSSIBLE EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC 1 To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report. 2 To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.