WITNEY ACTIVE TRAVEL SCHEME ANNEXES 2 - 11 Annex 2: Plan of Proposed 20Mph Speed Limits

WITNEY ACTIVE TRAVEL SCHEME ANNEXES 2 - 11 Annex 2: Plan of proposed 20mph speed limits ...... 2 Annex 3: Oxfordshire County Council Witney Active Travel Corridor Scheme – List of Stakeholders November 2020 ...... 3 Annex 4: Transport Modelling Summary ...... 5 Annex 5: Witney Active Travel Scheme Consultation Summary ...... 7 Annex 6: Consultation Questionnaire ...... 20 Annex 7: Quantitative Consultation Questionnaire Responses ...... 40 Annex 8: Written Responses and responses to Questionnaire Q8, Q11, Q16...... 53 Annex 9: Postcode Map of respondents ...... 235 Annex 10: Financials: Estimated Final Costs & Proposed Funding Plan ...... 236 Annex 11: Equality and Climate Impact Assessment ...... 237

Annex 1: Plan of consultation corridor is available in a separate document.

Annex 2: Plan of proposed 20mph speed limits

Annex 3: Oxfordshire County Council Witney Active Travel Corridor Scheme – List of Stakeholders November 2020

Stakeholder Name and role Oxfordshire County Council - Cabinet Member Councillor Yvonne Constance, Cabinet Member for Environment Councillor Liam Walker, Cabinet Member for Highways Delivery & Operations Oxfordshire County Council – Local Members Councillor Suzanne Bartington – North and East (Member of Witney TAC also) Councillor Laura Price – South and Central (Chair of Witney TAC also) Councillor Ted Fenton – Witney West & Bampton (Member of Witney TAC also) West Oxfordshire District Councillors Councillor Suzi Coul – Cabinet Member for Healthy Communities and Public and Community Health Councillor Luci Ashbourne – Central Councillor Andrew Coles – Central (also on Witney TAC) Councillor Joy Aitman – East Councillor Rosa Bolger – East Councillor Duncan Enright - East Councillor Owen Collins – South Councillor Jane Doughty – South Councillor David Harvey – South Councillor Louise Chapman – West Councillor Harry Eaglestone – West Councillor Toby Morris (North and also Witney TAC) Councillor Richard Langridge - North Councillor Dan Levy – WODC Cycling Champion. West Oxfordshire District Council Officers Kim Hudson, Planning Policy Janice Bamsey, Planning Policy Nick Dalby, Environment Planning Will Barton, Economic Development

Witney Town Council (WTC) Sharon Groth - Clerk Councillor Joy Aitman – Mayor Councillor Ruth Smith - Central (and chair of Climate, Biodiversity and Planning Committee Councillor Luci Ashbourne - Central Councillor Liz Duncan - Central Councillor Rosa Bolger – East Councillor Duncan Enright – East Councillor Vicky Gwatkin – East (and Witney TAC) Councillor Daniel Butterfield – South Councillor Owen Collins – South Councillor Melanie Jones – South Councillor Jim King – West and on the Witney TAC Councillor Thomas Ashby – West Councillor Harry Eaglestone – West Councillor Dean Temple – North Councillor Andy McMahon – Member of the Climate, Biodiversity

Annex 4: Transport Modelling Summary

1. The Witney Highway Saturn Model has been used to consider the implications of the proposals for an eastbound bus and cycle only land at Upper Corn Street, the closure of High Street south of Welch Way and the closure of Holloway Road.

2. The modelling results were received during the consultation period and due to the pace at which this scheme is progressing have not yet been fully analysed. However, some key findings have been produced for the AM peak only.

Holloway Road 3. The Witney highway model select link analysis tool indicates where on the network traffic on a specific link has come from and is routing to. In the 2018 AM Peak base model for Holloway Road northbound the demand flow is 45 PCUs much of this traffic has routed from Witan Way and is going to destinations on Holloway Road or Moor Avenue.

4. For Holloway Road southbound the base 2018 AM Peak demand flow is 34 PCUs much of this traffic has routed from Holloway Road or Moor Avenue and is going to destinations at Witan Way.

5. This indicates there is local accessibility to reach destinations on Holloway Road. High levels of rat-running are not indicated.

6. The traffic model outputs for Scenario 1 with Corn Street Restrictions for Holloway Road northbound during the AM Peak the demand flow is 114 PCUs. Much of this traffic, around 66 PCUs, are originating from The Crofts and other residential areas south of Corn Street. This is due to the Corn Street restrictions preventing these residents travelling due east on Corn Street. The destinations are wider than in the Base Year, with traffic travelling on to High Street/Bridge Street area. It is noted that none of the traffic travelling northbound on Holloway Road originates from west of Corn Street, indicating that trips from a wider area not re-routing via Holloway Road due to the Corn Street restrictions.

7. For Holloway Road southbound the with the Corn Street restrictions the AM Peak demand flow is 4 PCUs. Much of this traffic has routed from Holloway Road or Moor Avenue and is going to The Crofts and areas on the southside of Corn Street.

8. This indicates the Corn Street restriction significantly reduces traffic southbound on Holloway Road during the AM Peak.

9. Therefore, the local amenity afforded by Holloway Road does not appear to alter significantly due to the Corn Street restrictions. There does not appear to be any significant need to close Holloway Road due to the Corn Street restrictions. Notwithstanding that an increase in traffic using Holloway Road is predicted. 5

Wider Traffic Re-Routing 10. During the AM peak the modelling data indicates the closure of Corn Street in isolation (scenario 1) has a significantly impact on the eastern section of Welch Way for eastbound traffic. This is because this link runs parallel to the upper Corn Street link that has been closed in the model and it is the closest alternative route. Under scenario 1 eastbound traffic on Welch Way may increase by around 66%. However, under scenario 2 where the central section of High Street is also closed, in addition to upper Corn Street, the model indicates there to be significant increases in traffic on the section of High Street that remains open north of Welch Way northbound, and Witan Way eastbound, at 48% and 47% increases respectively.

11. These levels of increase, whilst are not unexpected, indicate more work is required to consider if the roads where the Corn Street traffic is rerouting to are suitable for this level of increase in traffic and what impact this has on congestion across Witney.

Annex 5: Witney Active Travel Scheme Consultation Summary

12. The Witney Active Travel scheme public consultation took place from 21 January to 11 February 2021. Key stakeholders were informed about the consultation via email and approximately 1500 letters were sent to frontage properties.

13. The consultation was publicised on our own website and via social media channels.

14. Respondents were asked to complete an online questionnaire. A total of 461 responses were received to the consultation of these, 424 were responses to the questionnaire and 37 were written (email/letter) submissions. The questionnaire is available in Annex 6. The questionnaire quantitative responses are available in Annex 7 and the qualitative and written responses are available within the Annex 8.

15. Analysis of questionnaire question one indicates that only 13 responses received were from businesses. This is a cause for concern, as the scheme directly impacts in the region of 45 businesses at upper Corn Street. The lack of responses from businesses may skew the consultation results and officers have been mindful of this when considering the recommended way forward.

16. A map showing the post code area of respondents is available in Annex 9. Most responses to the online questionnaire were provided by residents or representatives of businesses, groups or organisations in Witney or from the surrounding area. Of those who responded, 80% resided or represented businesses, groups or organisations in Witney and provided a postcode starting with OX28.

17. A small proportion of those (4%) who provided an OX28 postcode did not provide any additional digits and so they were excluded from further analysis. This further analysis showed that 28% of those who responded in Witney were from postcode area OX28 6. This includes Corn Street, High Street and areas north to approximately West End. A further 24% of responses were received from postcode OX28 5, which encompasses west Witney. The third most common area for responses was postcode OX28 1 (21%), which includes Madley Park and north Witney.

18. A further 12% of responses were received from areas surrounding Witney incorporated within the OX29 postcode. This includes Ducklington, Standlake, Minster Lovell and North Leigh. An additional 4% of responses were received from postcode OX18, which includes Carterton and Burford.

19. Within the questionnaire we asked five questions about what impact the scheme would have on residents and businesses. It was not mandatory to answer every question, therefore the number of responses to each question varies.

20. Question 5 asked “Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Witney active scheme when it has been delivered impacting on you?”. The responses can be seen in table 2 below.

21. Of the 416 respondents, 180 or 43% indicated the scheme would have a positive impact on them. However, 164 or 39% felt the impact would be negative.

Table 2: Responses to Q5. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Witney active scheme when it has been delivered impacting on you? Q5. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Witney active scheme when it has been delivered impacting on you? Response Option No. of responses Percentage Positive 180 43% Neutral 59 14% Negative 164 39% Don’t Know 13 3% Total responses 416 100%

22. Question 6 asked “Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on you?”. The responses can be seen in table 3 below.

23. Overall, 39% of people who responded predicted that the Holloway Road proposal would have a negative impact on them. In comparison, 30% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a neutral and 24% a positive impact on them.

Table 3: Responses to Q6. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on you? Q6. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on you?

Response Option No. of responses Percentage Positive 96 24% Neutral 121 30% Negative 156 39% Don’t Know 28 7% Total responses 401 100%

24. Question 7 asked “If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?” The responses can be seen in table 4 below. 8

25. Overall, 37% of people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group predicted that the Holloway Road proposal would have a negative impact on the business, organisation or group they represent. In comparison, 10% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a positive impact and 20% felt the impact would be neutral on the business, organisation or group they represent. 33% of respondents were unsure of the impact of the Holloway Road proposal.

Table 4: Responses to Q7. If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group? Q7. If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group? Response Option No. of responses Percentage Positive 12 10 Neutral 25 37 Negative 45 20 Don’t Know 40 33 Total responses 122 100%

26. Question 9 asked “Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on you?”. The responses can be seen in table 5 below.

27. Overall, 52% of people who responded predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a positive or neutral impact on them. In comparison, 46% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a negative impact on them.

Table 5: Responses to Q9. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on you? Q9. Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on you?

Response Option No. of responses Percentage Positive 152 38% Neutral 56 14% Negative 182 46% Don’t Know 8 2% Total responses 398 100%

28. Question 10 asked “If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?”. The responses can be seen in table 6 below.

29. Of the people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group, over half (53%) predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a negative impact on the business, organisation or group they represent. In comparison, 14% of respondents predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a positive impact on the business, organisation or group they represent.

Table 6: Responses to Q10. If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group? Q10. If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group? Response Option No. of responses Percentage Positive 15 14% Neutral 11 10% Negative 56 53% Don’t Know 23 22% Total responses 105 100%

30. Three questions invited people to provide comments on the proposals, these were: • Q8. Specifically, what impact do you think the Holloway Road proposal will have on your business or organisation? Please provide comments to support your views. • Q11. Specifically, what impact do you think the Corn Street proposal will have on your business or organisation? Please provide comments to support your views. • Q16. Please provide any additional comments you have on the active travel scheme for Witney, shown in this map, which haven’t already been covered in your feedback.

Comments received in against the scheme

31. A summary of the key objections or concerns from the responses to Q8, Q11 and Q16, with officer response, are shown in table 7.

Table 7: Key objections or concerns from the responses to Q8, Q11 and Q16 with officer response.

Scheme Section Key Themes for Objections or Concerns Officer Response

1. Tower Hill: Need to ensure that the creation of a shared use path isn’t to the detriment of Scheme designed to meet current national guidance. pedestrian safety, particularly bearing in mind the gradient here and the need to consider all users such as those with disabilities. Is two-way cycling on the proposed route really practical? Shared space on Tower Hill dangerous. Tower Hill crossing is unnecessary. Toucan crossing is proposed to enable mounted cyclists to ride across the crossing. Narrowing Tower Hill road will increase risk of vehicle collisions. The accident rate will be monitored post scheme. Widening path on Tower Hill without traffic calming is dangerous. 2. Five Ways roundabout: The existing crossing on Corn Street is not suitable for off-carriageway cycling. Installing parallel or signalises crossings at Five Ways Suggest moving the crossing further from the roundabout and making it a roundabout is outside the scope and budget of this Parallel Crossing at Corn Street and at Welch Way. scheme. Using parallel crossings would make the crossings more obvious. Transport planning to address cycle provision at roundabout will be pursued through the Witney Toucan or pelican crossings are needed at all arms of the Five Ways Transport Strategy and proposed Local Cycling and roundabout. Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

Dangers to on-road cyclists at Five Ways and Witan Way have not been This scheme has not been able to achieve a full addressed in the scheme. scheme at Five Ways and Witan Way roundabouts Whole of five ways roundabout is dangerous, and this has not been addressed due to time and budget limitations.

Widening the traffic island at the western end of Corn Street will make an This will be considered during the design phase. already tight turn worse. Corn Street Where is the Corn Street turning area for vehicles travelling eastbound which The proposal for one-way at Corn Street is cannot progress along the bus and cycle lane going to be? recommended for deferral, to be looked at further 3. Corn Street from under the Witney Transport Strategy. Fiveways roundabout to There will be a significant traffic impact due to the Corn Street Closure on Holloway Road wider Witney, in particular Welch Way. The top of Corn Street will not be improved by making it one way. It will add to and problems rather than reduce them. 4. Corn Street from Holloway Road to Market No evidence that limiting cars in one direction will make this any safer for the Square. disruption it will cause. Traffic will be displaced elsewhere on an already saturated road network if Corn Street is one-way. This will increase congestion, journey times and miles 11

travelled across Witney. Displaced traffic and rerouting are likely to increase emissions from vehicles. To make Corn Street an attractive and safe cycle route need to remove greater levels of traffic. The chicanes/build outs should be removed

Removal of the Corn Street chicanes/build outs will increase speeds and loss of cycle parking. Loss of chicanes/build outs making it harder for people who walk to cross. Removal of loading outside people’s properties, will create hazards and safety issues as people will be crossing the road with large deliveries. Negative impact on Corn Street businesses. Particularly for loading, as there is no alternative access.

Drop off and pick up from The Batt School will be more challenging due to difficulty driving to school and increased time journey will take.

Concerns regarding the loss of parking on Corn Street on the northern side. The scheme would contribute to businesses closing in Corn Street as less footfall would occur if they can only park vehicles at Marriott's or Waitrose. Residents parking/permit parking is needed on Corn Street. Too little enforcement at present especially in the evenings at Corn Street where there is illegal parking. Traffic restrictions need greater (camera) enforcement. Vehicle parking on south side of Corn Street creates a hazardous environment for cyclists which the scheme does not address. Main issues with upper Corn Street are related to the illegal parking and buses negotiating obstructions this brings. Objections to the impact the Corn Street bus and cycle lane will have on people accessing their properties at Swan Court and Marlborough Lane (i.e. westbound only) Suggestion that Marlborough Lane residents would have to use or would increasingly use the Market Square access. Concerns there will be inadequate access to Marlborough Lane for parking, deliveries and waste collection. Zebra crossings are needed at Marlborough Lane and at Market Place. Buses present a hazard to cyclists on Corn Street Corn Street has adequate space from frontage to frontage to accommodate a 12

segregated cycle lane. Provision of protected cycle space west of Holloway Road should be considered. The cycle lane on corn street must be mandatory, not advisory (or it's pointless). Closure to both eastbound and westbound motor traffic between Holloway Road and Market Place should be considered. Does the Corn Street proposals meet the aims? These are significant measures which have been subject to minimal consultation. Therefore, the potential implications to businesses, local residents and the Batt School have not been properly explored given the limited level of engagement and time to prepare these plans. Corn Street is dangerous for cyclists. Drivers will not adhere to signage on Corn Street and this will place people who cycle at more danger. Cannot cycle or walk due to disabilities and scheme will make driving more difficult Buses should be removed from Corn Street. Signage needs decluttering A general observation is that very few Henry box pupils use a push bike. This was also true pre COVID. A cycle lane may help a little with uptake. It would however probably be better to route them via The Crofts. Holloway Road Closure The lack of an identified turning area for all vehicles, including HGV’s makes We recommend the Holloway Road closure is part of 4. Corn Street (from the scheme unworkable. removed from the proposals due to the information Holloway Road to Market Holloway Road provides a vital route for the small number of residents of the received from consultees, and the traffic modelling Square): Crofts, Weavers Close and Swan Court who need to use it in order to access evidence. Welch Way, Bridge Street or Witney East. Access to Holloway Road required by health care (such as district nurses) providers as well as emergency services. Holloway Road residents will be adding to congestion if the road is closed due to the re-routing, particularly impacting Welch Way, and Corn Street. Holloway Road is not a rat run. Holloway Road has an on street parking issue which is hazardous for walking and cycling. There is no issue at Holloway Road pre-scheme. If the Corn Street scheme creates a rat-run via Holloway Road, then the Corn Street scheme is ill- conceived, and should be reviewed. Negative impact on town bus service routing.

Traffic congestion and delays will be exacerbated across Witney. The scheme will create problems for people getting children to and from school. When will the High Street will reopen, as this will make journeys very long if it is closed and Corn Street/ Holloway Road measures are implemented.

5. Market Square: Market Square, High Street and Church Green should all be restricted to This may be considered further under the Witney motorised traffic / car free. Transport Strategy. Any future measures should not compromise the temporary measures to close Noted. the High Street until a decision is made on the longer term plans for this area. The junction is quite a large expanse of tarmac, the junction needs tightening This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. up to slow traffic. This may be considered further under the Witney Transport Strategy. 6. Langdale Gate: Langdale Gate will be intimidating for inexperienced people on bicycles. This will be considered during the design phase.

In our view the cycle route should be signed along Crown Lane to avoid This will be considered during the design phase. confusion about legality. It is a footpath with a history of use as a cycle route rather than a footway. We suggest the cycle route re-joins the carriageway at the entrance to Langdale Hall car park as the least worst option.

It's not clear how advisory cycle lanes will remain useful where there is This will be considered during the design phase. currently a bus stop on the southern side and informal disabled parking on the double yellow lines on the northern side.

8. Langel Common from This section of path already gets congested. It needs widening by at least 1m This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. Witan Way to Church to make walking more relaxed. This would include widening the bridges when This may be considered further under the Witney Lane: they reach the end of their service life. Transport Strategy.

With only an ‘improvement’ to the existing path and a review of the lighting Noted. seems to me insufficient to encourage more people to utilise the E-W route safely. Could the cycle path from Cogges to the leisure centre be properly marked up. This will be considered during the design phase. Most people are unsure what side is the cycle lane (better signage please Street lighting is not environmentally friendly. This will be considered during the design phase. 7. Witan Way Roundabout: Any option involving a refuge in the middle of the road will be insufficiently This will be considered during the design phase. large to make it safe for many users and will still involve dismounting and managing moving motor vehicles. 9. Church Lane: We suggest that the speed limit is focussed on Church Lane only where This is unlikely to be practical; however, 20mph speeds are higher and it will avoid additional signage around Cogges Manor signage will be kept to a minimum due to the 14

Farm, potentially harming its historic setting. conservation and historic setting.

We recommend minimal road surface markings and other signage due to the sensitivity of the area around Cogges Farm. Cogges Farm forms a cluster of Listed Buildings and is a Scheduled Ancient Monument situated in the Conservation Area. Traffic and speed levels are currently low so excessive signage/ road marking is not considered necessary and will detract from the character of the area.

Measures needed to slow down speeding cyclist between Langel Common Noted. and Church Lane. There is a problem with visibility when turning out of Meadow View often This will be considered during the design phase. obscured by proximity of parked vehicles. 10. Oxford Hill junction The junction of Newland/Oxford Hill/Church Lane should be signalised with This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. with Church Lane: pedestrian/cycle phases. This may be considered further under the Witney Transport Strategy. No dismount or change of bicycle direction should be required to follow the Noted. walking and cycling route. Oxford Hill crossing not on desire line. Noted.

11. Oxford Hill to Courts The track from Woodbank should be upgraded all the way to Oxford Hill to This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. Gardens (path to Madley help reduce congestion along this section. This may be considered further under the Witney Park): Transport Strategy. Narrowness of path from Oxford Hill to Court Gardens needs addressing. This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. This may be considered further under the Witney Transport Strategy. 12. Courts Garden to Park The bridge is poorly aligned and paths too narrow for cyclists to traverse. This is outside the scope and budget of this scheme. View Court (path to Madley This may be considered further under the Witney Park): Transport Strategy. 13. Park View Court to Long campaign this section of unmade track to be surfaced and lit. Noted Woodbank (path to Madley This will be considered during the design phase. Park). As it is essentially a new track surface, make it a segregated track. Feels unsafe and a hazardous in the dark. Noted 14. Woodbank to The concrete bridge is unsafe. Noted footbridge over Madley Brook. 15. Woodbank. Do not bring the path closer to residential properties. Noted 16. Woodbank to Wood Ensure improvements to not impact on potential of flooding to neighbouring This will be considered during the design phase. 15

Green School Entrance. properties. 20mph speed limit Enforcement of the 20mph speed limit is required. Noted. The aim should be to balance the advantages of reducing speeds whilst Noted. minimising signage and considering the design/ location of signs to conserve and enhance the Conservation Area. Therefore, we should be focusing on the High Street where there are clear benefits to this speed limit. Any road scheme that slows down traffic as it does so at the expense of Noted. economic activity and will harm local businesses. Road Signs and Lines It is important to consider the historic environment in assessing the design and This will be considered during the design phase. location of proposed cycle signage, particularly in the Conservation Area. Additional signage should be kept to a minimum and existing signage should rationalised and improved where possible.

Dedicated space for Stepped cycle tracks alongside pedestrian tracks would be preferential, these This will be considered through the Witney Transport cycling can then slip on and off the road with buffer zones around parking. Strategy and proposed Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). Lack of adherence to Department for Transport Local Transport Note (LTN) Department for Transport Local Transport Note (LTN) 1/20. 1/20 has been used to inform the design process. Cyclists should have fully segregated infrastructure. Cycle lanes that are not This will be considered further through the Witney segregated or mandatory are not infrastructure. Transport Strategy and proposed Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). Scheme is not ambitious enough – need full segregation. Noted. Active travel scheme does not address barriers to cycling. Noted. Advisory cycle lanes The advisory cycle lanes offer only weak protection and may not be compliant Department for Transport Local Transport Note (LTN) with to Department for Transport Local Transport Note (LTN) 1/20. 1/20 has been used to inform the design process. Care has been taken with the design of the advisory cycle lanes to follow the LTN 1/20 guidance. There is a risk of car doors opening onto cyclists. This will be considered during the design phase. Improvements do not meet latest design standards. Department for Transport Local Transport Note (LTN) 1/20 has been used to inform the design process. Shared-use Paths The proposals for shared-use paths impact negative impact on walking. Noted. There is an increased risk of blind and deaf people coming into conflict with We seek to address this through the design phased. people who cycle. Shared use paths dangerous for people who walk, children and disabled. We seek to address this through the design phased.

There is far too much shared use (pedestrian – cycle user) provision Noted. proposed. Shared use facilities are not popular with pedestrians or cycle users. This unpopularity can be ameliorated by implementing shared use that meets current guidance, or segregated facilities. 16

Bus Passengers That the council is seeking to reduce the number of public transport trips We do not have an objective to reduce public “especially for shorter journeys”. transport use and not suggesting or proposing that public transport is reduced. Public transport is vital to giving people sustainable transport options. Walking Infrastructure There is no attempt to improve conditions for walking. The proposals make Where we are implementing shared pedestrian and conditions for walking on the off-road sections increasingly hazardous. cycle paths the design is being managed through No thought given to the appropriateness of shared use pedestrian and adherence to the Department for Transport’s Cycle facilities. Infrastructure Design Local Transport Note 1/20 (July 2020) design guidance, which states where route traffic is up to 300 pedestrians and 300 cyclists per hour the path width should be a minimum of 3.0m. Walking has not been considered and the danger people who cycle present to Noted. people who walk. Permanent pedestrianisation of High Street needed Noted.

Consultation and Short timeframe to respond and the businesses closed due to government We agree that relatively few businesses have Engagement guidance are not aware of the scheme. responded, and that is contributing to why we are deferring the Corn Street elements of the scheme. Lack of detail provided means it is hard to comment fully. Noted. Lack of important details in this consultation means we cannot determine the Noted. quality of the intended design. The scheme objectives could have been focussed on how to extend National Noted. Cycle Route 57 through Witney. Surveys have been conducted during lockdown Surveys to collect traffic speed data have been conducted during covid-19 restrictions in December 2020 and January 2021. We consider that the speed data collected gives a good indication of average speed of vehicles. It could be argued that as there is less traffic at the moment vehicle speeds may be greater than pre-2020 speeds. Limited consultation period Noted. Bias questionnaire Noted. Safety Some of the proposals will discourage the very new and inexperienced cyclists Noted. that this scheme ought to be aimed at. People who cycle are not prioritised in the scheme – at any junction cars are Noted. still given priority.

Proposals do not go far enough, safety concerns for on-road cycling and need Noted. 17

for fully segregated spaces to walk, cycle and drive.

Cyclists should be insured and have certified road worthy bikes. Cycling Noted. proficiency should be mandatory, as a driving license is.

Value for Money Scheme not value for money / Money could be spent better elsewhere Noted. The scheme will have little benefits and will not create modal shift and so will Noted. not be money well spent.

I believe you are looking to solve a problem that isn't there Noted. Toucan crossings are a waste of money. Noted. Impact on age and Older people are not able to cycle and walk easily. Noted. disability The plan is too narrow in thinking and fully biased towards fit people who cycle Noted. or walk. It is not inclusive at all. Discriminates against disabled people who rely on driving. The recommended proposals do not alter where people can drive to. Maintenance Cycleways need ongoing maintenance. Noted. Cycle Parking The provision of cycle parking is inadequate. This will be considered further through the Witney Transport Strategy and proposed Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). Air Quality Measures will not improve Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) Whilst there are no measures directly in the AQMA, any increased trips by walking and cycling, which would have previously been undertaken by car, will be a positive step in addressing the AQMA. Suggestions for additional There were a great many suggestions for other schemes across Witney. These will be considered through the Witney schemes Transport Strategy and proposed Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

Comments received in support the scheme

32. A summary of the key comments in support for the scheme from the responses to Q8, Q11 and Q16 are listed below:

33. A few respondents were in favour of the proposed closure of Holloway Road. Comments included those who felt the road would be safer, the rat-run would be resolved and the street environment more pleasant.

34. A few respondents were in favour of the proposals for upper Corn Street, comments included that buses would be less delayed, a safer, quieter and less polluted street. A reduction in motor traffic would make cycling more pleasant. One person said ideally more parking needs to be removed as well.

35. Other comments received are: • Brilliant scheme. • Will make my commute easier and safer. • Would like to see this extended across Witney. • Any cycle improvements are welcome. • Traffic reduction and improved health, safety, air quality. • Cycling enabled off-road which will be safer for visually impaired cyclist. • Many positives to upgrading the Madley Park track. • Great for us to bike as a family and for biking to school instead of going in the car. • Better for the environment. • There is a silent majority who support and so residents who object shouldn’t be disproportionately considered. • Discourage car dependency. • Make Witney a much more pleasant and healthy environment for people. • The proposed changes to the paths between Woodbank and Newland and between Woodbank and Woodstock Road will improve my experience of waking to/from the town centre. • I think it is a great idea and of its time right now. • Safe and convenient cycling. • The scheme is excellent and much needed.

Annex 6: Consultation Questionnaire

Oxfordshire County Council has funding from government and the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP) to help people make more journeys in the town by bike or on foot. We call this active travel and we have involved local people and groups to help us to develop the proposed changes.

The Witney active travel scheme will deliver sustainable cycle routes across central Witney and join-up with further future improvements to walking and cycling in western Witney. It will provide a continuous east-west route across the whole town, making it easier for people to travel by bike or on foot.

Please say whether you are responding as a...

You must provide an answer to this question.

•

Resident of Witney

•

Resident from surrounding area

•

Tourist/visitor to the area

•

Local business

• 20

Representative from a group or organisation

Other (please specify)

Please enter the first five digits of your postcode e.g. OX28 1 (not the last two letters) so we can understand the impact on and views of residents and businesses of individual streets.

You must provide an answer to this question.

Answer 3

If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation, or group, what is the name of it?

Answer

We want to know how people currently travel for local journeys within Witney (e.g. to go shopping, go to work, school run, socialising, run errands etc.)

For each of the following ways of travel, please say how often you use them for local journeys within Witney

Select the most applicable option in each row.

Grid showing question statements vs. ration options Most days A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times a Never 21

week week month year

Car driver Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Car passenger Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never Car club driver or Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times passenger days week week month a year Never

Bus Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Cycling Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Walking Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Taxi Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Motorbike or moped Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Mobility scooter Most A few times a About once a About once or twice a Now and again – few times days week week month a year Never

Are there any other ways you travel?

As we previously explained, the Witney active travel scheme will deliver sustainable cycle routes across central Witney and join-up with further future improvements to walking and cycling in western Witney. It will provide a continuous east-west route across the whole town, making it easier for people to travel by bike or on foot.

As part of this work we will be introducing several measures to slow vehicle traffic and prioritise cycling and walking. All the elements in the Witney active travel scheme are shown on this map and are in the consultation documents section on the homepage of this consultation. We have also provided more details in the FAQs.

In summary they include:

• Widening paths to create a safer environment to cycle and walk. • Upgrading crossings to toucan crossings to allow walkers and mounted cyclists to cross.

Example of a toucan crossing

• Introducing an eastbound bus and cycle only lane at Corn Street, where general traffic will only be allowed westbound (away from Buttercross). • Closing Holloway Road to through traffic to prevent rat running.

Please be assured there will be no impact or change to emergency vehicles access or to accessible (disabled) parking spaces.

As part of the Witney active travel scheme we are proposing to introduce an eastbound bus and cycle only lane at Corn Street, where general traffic will only be allowed westbound (away from Buttercross).

It would be helpful to understand how you currently use Corn Street and the potential impact this change will have on you so that we can take this into account when designing the scheme.

Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Witney active scheme when it has been delivered impacting on you?

•

Positive

•

Negative

•

Neutral

•

Don’t know

As part of the Witney active travel scheme we are proposing to close Holloway Road to through traffic to prevent rat running.

It would be helpful to understand how you currently use Holloway Road and the potential impact this change will have on you so that we can take this into account when designing the scheme.

Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on you?

•

Positive

•

Negative

•

Neutral

•

Don’t know

If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?

•

Positive

•

Negative

•

Neutral

•

Don’t know

Specifically, what impact do you think the Holloway Road proposal will have on your business or organisation?

Select the most applicable option in each row.

Grid showing question statements vs. ration options Positive Neutral Negative Don’t know My customers or members Positive Neutral Negative Don’t know My staff or volunteers Positive Neutral Negative Don’t know My deliveries incoming and outgoing Positive Neutral Negative Don’t know

Please provide comments to support your views:

As part of the Witney active travel scheme we are proposing to restrict eastbound traffic along Corn Street from Holloway Road to Market Square by making this a bus and cycle only lane.

It would be helpful to understand how you currently use this section of Corn Street and the potential impact this change will have on you so that we can take this into account when designing the scheme.

Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on you?

•

Positive

•

Negative

•

Neutral

•

Don’t know

If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?

•

Positive

•

Negative

•

Neutral

•

Don’t know

Specifically, what impact do you think the Corn Street proposal will have on your business or organisation?

Select the most applicable option in each row.

Grid showing question statements vs. ration options Positive Negative Neutral Don’t know My customers or members Positive Negative Neutral Don’t know My staff or volunteers Positive Negative Neutral Don’t know My deliveries incoming and outgoing Positive Negative Neutral Don’t know

Please provide comments to support your views:

When the Witney active travel scheme is delivered and the proposed measures to improve cycling and walking are in place, we are interested to know to what extent you think you will increase trips within Witney by bike or on foot.

How likely are you to cycle more?

•

Very likely

•

Likely

•

Somewhat likely

•

Very unlikely

•

No change, I already use cycling as one of my main ways of getting around

•

Don’t know

Please select up to 3 reasons that best describe why you would cycle more:

•

It will be quicker to cycle

•

It will be safer to cycle

•

It will help my fitness to cycle

•

It is better for the environment to cycle

• 29

It will be more convenient to cycle

•

Other

Please specifiy:

How likely are you to walk more?

•

Very likely

•

Likely

•

Somewhat likely

•

Very unlikely

•

No change, I already use walking as one of my main ways of getting around

•

Don't know

Please select up to 3 reasons that best describe why you would walk more:

•

It will be quicker to walk

•

It will be safer to walk

•

It will help my fitness to walk

•

It is better for the environment to walk

•

It will be more convenient to walk

•

Other 31

Please specifiy:

Please provide any additional comments you have on the active travel scheme for Witney, shown in this map, which haven’t already been covered in your feedback

q7085411ft

About you

We would like to know more about you so that we can understand more about our customers and residents. It helps us to know if we are hearing the views of a wide range of people and communities.

If you do not want to provide any of this information, please select prefer not to say.

All information given is anonymous and is governed by the General Data Protection Regulations 2018.

How did you find out about this consultation?

• 32

Facebook

•

Twitter

•

Instagram

•

Email from the county council

•

Oxfordshire.gov.uk website

•

Parish or town council

•

Local community group/organisation

•

Friend/relative 33

•

Letter drop

•

Other

If other, please specify:

What is your age?

•

Under 16

•

16-24

•

25-34

•

35-44

•

45-54

•

55-64

•

65 and over

•

Prefer not to say

What is your ethnic group?

•

Asian or Asian British (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or any other Asian background)

•

Black or Black British (Caribbean, African, or any other Black background)

•

Chinese

•

Mixed (White and Black Caribbean, White and Black African, White and Asian and any other mixed background) 35

•

White (British, Irish, Scottish or any other white background)

•

Prefer not to say

•

Other ethnic group (please specify)

Are you...?

•

Female

•

Male

•

Other

•

Prefer not to say

21 36

Are your day to day activities limited because of a long-term illness, health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months?

•

Yes - limited a lot

•

Yes - limited a little

•

Prefer not to say

If you have answered yes please tell us how best to describe your disability or disabilities

•

Mobility issues

•

Sight issues

•

Hearing issues

•

General health issues

•

Prefer not to say

Please enter any additional comments

Under the Data Protection Act 2018, we (Oxfordshire County Council) have a legal duty to protect any personal information we collect from you. Oxfordshire County Council is committed to open government and this may include quoting extracts from your consultation response in our report.

We will not however, disclose the names of people who have responded unless they have provided consent. For this purpose we ask that you are careful not to disclose personal information in your comments – for example the names of service users or children. If you do not want all or part of your response to be made public or share with councillors, please state below which parts you wish us to keep confidential.

View Oxfordshire County Council’s privacy notice online at www.oxfordshire.gov.uk - search privacy notice.

Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. Finally, we would like to keep you in touch with the results of this consultation and news of the Witney active travel scheme.

By saying yes, you are giving your consent for Oxfordshire County Council to hold your contact details.

We promise:

• not to link your survey response to your name and contact details (unless you have asked us to) • to hold your information securely and not pass it onto anyone else without your permission 38

• to only use your contact details for the purposes above

You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by writing to [email protected] or by writing to: Witney active travel scheme, FREEPOST OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (No further address details required).

•

Yes

•

• If option 1 (Yes) of this question was selected then jump to the next item in the questionnaire • If option 2 (No) of this question was selected then jump to Now please submit your response by clicking 'Finish' below ( . )

Consent

Yes, I consent for Oxfordshire County Council to hold my personal details and to re-contact me for consultation and/or engagement purposes. I confirm that I have read the statement above describing how my data will be used and I understand how to withdraw my consent.

Please enter your email address in the box below:

Answer Now please submit your response by clicking 'Finish' below

Annex 7: Quantitative Consultation Questionnaire Responses

Question: [1] Please say whether you are responding as a…

Respondent Total Percentage (%) Resident of Witney 337 80 Resident from surrounding area 69 16 Tourist/ visitor to the area 2 1 Local business 10 2 Representative from a group or 6 1 organisation Overall total 424 100

In total, 424 people responded to the questionnaire, although not every person answered every question. Most respondents were a resident of Witney (80%) or from the surrounding area (16%). Representatives from a group or organisation and tourists/ visitors to the area accounted for the smallest number of respondents (1% each).

Question: [2] Please enter the first five digits of your postcode e.g. OX28 1 (not the last two letters) so we can understand the impact on and views of residents and businesses of individual streets.

A postcode map of respondents is shown in Annex 9.

Question: [3] If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, what is the name of it?

Business, Organisation or Group Name Witney Parish Transport Representative CPRE IN2PETS Witney Antiques W R Harvey & Co (Antiques) Ltd Mace corn street newsagents Madley Park Residents Association 40

As a councillor Greenway Antiques I am a Town Councillor and Resident of Witney Town Council Disabled people Eagle Tavern Fat lils The eagle tavern Verve & Virtue Windrush Bike Project Oxfordshire County Council

In total, 17 names from representatives of businesses, organisations or groups were provided.

Question: [4] For each of the following ways of travel, please say how often you use them for local journeys within Witney: Most A few About About Now Never days times a once a once or and week week twice a again – month few times a year Car driver 96 136 97 40 17 34

Car passenger 18 39 66 73 83 67

Car club driver or 5 1 2 2 6 277 passenger Bus 6 13 16 41 122 143

Cycling 41 58 30 47 59 133

Walking 198 99 37 26 20 23

Taxi 1 1 1 7 84 236

Motorbike or 2 3 0 10 4 319 moped

Mobility scooter 2 0 0 1 1 332

Of the people who responded, walking is the most common form of travel for daily local journeys within Witney, with 198 respondents indicating this. This is followed by car driving, selected by 96 respondents and cycling, selected by 41 respondents.

Car travel, either as a driver or passenger, was selected 648 times as the mode for at least one local journey a week in Witney. In comparison, walking or cycling were selected 509 times for at least one local journey a week in Witney (a difference of 24%).

Question: [5] Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Witney active scheme when it has been delivered impacting on you?

Response Total Percentage (%) Positive 180 43 Negative 164 39 Neutral 59 14 Don’t know 13 3

Overall, 43% of people who responded predicted that the Witney active travel scheme would have a positive impact on them, compared to 39% who predicted it would have a negative impact on them.

Question: [6] Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on you?

Response Total Percentage (%) Positive 96 24 Negative 156 39 42

Neutral 121 30 Don’t know 28 7

Overall, 39% of people who responded predicted that the Holloway Road proposal would have a negative impact on them. In comparison, 30% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a neutral and 24% a positive impact on them.

Question: [7] If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Holloway Road proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?

Response Total Percentage (%) Positive 12 10 Negative 45 37 Neutral 25 20 Don’t know 40 33

Overall, 37% of people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group predicted that the Holloway Road proposal would have a negative impact on the business, organisation or group they represent. In comparison, 10% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a positive impact and 20% felt the impact would be neutral on the business, organisation or group they represent. 33% of respondents were unsure of the impact of the Holloway Road proposal.

Question: [8] Specifically, what impact do you think the Holloway Road proposal will have on your business or organisation?

Positive Neutral Negative Don’t know

My customers or members 14 21 48 32 Of the people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group, most predicted the Holloway Road proposal will have a negative impact on customers My staff or volunteers 13 15 47 27 or members, staff or volunteers and deliveries incoming and outgoing. However, a large proportion of My deliveries incoming and 10 16 54 29 respondents were unsure of the impact of the proposal outgoing on their business or organisation.

Question: [9] Overall, if you are a resident how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on you? 43

Response Total Percentage (%) Positive 152 38 Negative 182 46 Neutral 56 14 Don’t know 8 2

Overall, 52% of people who responded predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a positive or neutral impact on them. In comparison, 46% of respondents predicted that the proposal would have a negative impact on them.

Question: [10] If you are responding on behalf of a business, organisation or group, overall, how would you predict the Corn Street proposal impacting on your business, organisation or group?

Response Total Percentage (%) Positive 15 14 Negative 56 53 Neutral 11 11 Don’t know 23 22

Of the people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group, over half (53%) predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a negative impact on the business, organisation or group they represent. In comparison, 14% of respondents predicted that the Corn Street proposal would have a positive impact on the business, organisation or group they represent.

Question: [11] Specifically, what impact do you think the Corn Street proposal will have on your business or organisation?

Positive Negative Neutral Don’t know

My customers or members 16 49 13 17

My staff or volunteers 13 52 10 16

My deliveries incoming and 9 56 11 18 outgoing

Of the people who responded on behalf of a business, organisation or group, most predicted the Corn Street proposal will have a negative impact on customers or members, staff or volunteers and deliveries incoming and outgoing.

Question: [12] How likely are you to cycle more?

Response Total Percentage (%) Very likely 84 20

Likely 41 10

Somewhat likely 46 11

Very unlikely 199 47

No change, I already use cycling as one 42 10 of my main ways of getting around Don’t know 8 2

Of the people who responded, 47% indicated that they would be very unlikely to cycle more as a result of the Witney active travel scheme. In comparison, 41% of respondents indicated that they would be somewhat to very likely to cycle more as a result of the scheme.

Question: [13] Please select up to 3 reasons that best describe why you would cycle more:

Response Total Percentage (%) It will be quicker to cycle 66 24 It will be safer to cycle 152 56 It will help my fitness to cycle 108 40 It is better for the environment to cycle 126 46 It will be more convenient to cycle 64 24 Don’t know 35 13

Of the respondents who selected that they would cycle more, 56% indicated that this was due to safer cycling conditions. The positive impact on the environment was also rated highly, with 46% of respondents selecting this as a reason they would cycle more. A further 40% of respondents selected an improvement to fitness as a reason to cycle more.

Question: [14] How likely are you to walk more?

Response Total Percentage (%) Very likely 49 12

Likely 50 12

Somewhat likely 42 10

Very unlikely 94 23

No change, I already use cycling as one 174 42 of my main ways of getting around Don’t know 8 2

Of the people who responded, 42% indicated that there would be no change to the frequency that they walk as a result of the Witney active travel scheme. A further 34% of respondents indicated that they would be somewhat to very likely to walk more as a result of the scheme.

Question: [15] Please select up to 3 reasons that best describe why you would walk more:

Response Total Percentage (%) It will be quicker to walk 48 18 It will be safer to walk 105 40 It will help my fitness to walk 150 57 It is better for the environment to walk 127 48 It will be more convenient to walk 66 25 Don’t know 34 13

Of the respondents who selected that they would walk more, 57% indicated that this was due to the fitness benefits of walking. The positive impact on the environment was also rated highly, with 48% of respondents selecting this as a reason they would walk more. A further 40% of respondents selected the safer walking environment created by the scheme as a reason to walk more.

Question: [16] Please provide any additional comments you have on the active travel scheme for Witney, shown in this map, which haven’t already been covered in your feedback.

The responses to this question are shown in Annex 7.

Question: [17] How did you hear about this consultation?

Response Total Percentage (%) Facebook 188 46 Twitter 21 5 Instagram 1 <1 LinkedIn 2 <1 Email from the county council 39 9 Oxfordshire.gov.uk website 10 2 Parish or town council 10 2 Local community group/ organisation 20 5 Friend/ relative 32 8 Letter drop 53 13 Other 37 9 47

Most respondents found out about the consultation from Facebook (46%). At least 13% of respondents found out about the consultation from the letter drop. Of those who selected other, letter drop was also stated there (see table below).

Other sources Through stakeholder invitation Broadcast on Facebook by Labour Councillor Letter from OCC Council letter delivered, ref WITAT2 Letter from Oxfordshire County Council Letter addressed to The Householder Letter in the post Letter Letter from OCC as a local resident affected by the proposals Letter Letter from County Council Letter Letter from Oxfordshire County Council Letter drop Letter from OCC LETTER FROM THE COUNTY COUNCIL Nextdoor Delivered by post LETTER Letter ref WITAT2 Witney Gazette Website Witney Gazette, And what difference does it make about whatethnic group I am in Local paper Newspaper Public Notices Witney Gazette Press Witney Gazette 48

Well, it was posted through all of our letter boxes. How did you not know that. Newspaper Letter You sent me a letter Letter dated 21 January Letter from Oxfordshire Country Witney Gazette Letter from OCC Andrew Coles email By corn street residents Public Notices in local newspaper. As a statutory obligation, why was the option not listed above Local press – The Witney Gazette As a resident why were we not informed. Found out from a causal acquaintance Our County Councillor Suzanne Bartington W.O.D.C Wind rush bike project email Witney Gazette We received a letter from OCC but coverage from The Witney Gazette and Facebook has alerted us. Newspaper Just by chance as a friend rang e to say she had received a letter regarding the proposals. I had not. Street WhatsApp group chat Concerned customers and local town councillor

Question: [18] What is your age?

Response Total Percentage (%) Under 16 0 0 16-24 13 3 25-34 43 10 35-44 67 16 49

45-54 91 22 55-64 90 21 65 and over 101 24 Prefer not to say 17 4

Of those who responded, 67% were aged 45 and over, with 24% of these respondees being aged 65 and over.

Question: [19] What is your ethnic group?

Response Total Percentage (%) Asian or Asian British (Indian, Pakistani, 2 <1 Bangladeshi or any other Asian background)

Black or Black British (Caribbean, African, 1 <1 or any other Black background)

Chinese 2 <1

Mixed (White and Black Caribbean, White 2 <1 and Black African, White and Asian and any other mixed background) White (British, Irish, Scottish or any other 356 85 white background)

Prefer not to say 53 13

Other ethnic group (please specify) 1 <1

Other those who responded, 85% identified as white (British, Irish, Scottish or any other white background).

Question: [20] Are you…?

Response Total Percentage (%) Female 172 41 Male 208 50 Other 2 <1 Prefer not to say 34 8

Of those who responded, 50% were male and 41% were female.

Question: [21] Are your day to day activities limited because of a long-term illness, health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months?

Response Total Percentage (%) Yes – limited a lot 25 6 Yes – limited a little 42 10 No 329 78 Prefer not to say 27 6

Of those who responded, 78% indicated that their day to day activities were not limited because of a long-term illness, health problem or disability. In comparison, 16% of respondents indicated that their day to day activities were limited a little to a lot as a result of a long-term illness, health problem or disability.

Question: [22] If you have answered yes please tell us how best to describe your disability or disabilities.

Response Total Percentage (%) Mobility issues 44 47 Sight issues 5 5 Hearing issues 3 3 General health issues 29 31 Prefer not to say 21 22

Mobility issues was the most common disability selected by respondents (47%) who answered that their day to day activities were limited because of a long-term illness, health problem or disability. General health issues were the next most common disability selected by respondents (31%) who answered that their day to day activities were limited because of a long-term illness, health problem or disability.

Annex 8: Written Responses and responses to Questionnaire Q8, Q11, Q16.

Table 1: Written Responses to the Witney Active Travel Consultation RESPONDENT – ORGANISATIONS & COMMENTS – (as submitted, however names of members of the public have been removed) Councillors

Please would you accept the following as Witney Town Council’s response to the Witney Active Travel Scheme

1. That Witney Town Council welcomes this consultation on an active travel corridor from East to West Witney and acknowledges the timescales involved in implementing the measures. It would like to make the following observations concerning each section.

Tower Hill – Corn Street

The Town Council accepts the positive moves here overall and acknowledges that nothing will be perfect; it is regrettable but likely necessary to lose parking spaces to achieve the cycle lanes. The Town Council supports the measures to reduce traffic into Holloway Road, the addition of a controlled crossing Witney Town Council near to Marlborough Lane, the 20mph scheme, the central line in the hope of making vehicle users drive safely, and the cycle and bus lane at the start of Corn Street. After discussion on the merits of the build outs and the way they contribute to pedestrian safety, it agreed that ultimately, there simply needs to be enough space for the scheme here to be successful and safe.

There may be some future merit in extending the one-way system in Corn Street and improving the crossings to assist cyclists at the five ways roundabout.

Corn Street – Langel Common

Witney Town Council supports the proposals in this section of the corridor and accepts they marginally improve what is currently in place. It would however ask that consideration is given to extending the 20mph zones on the approach to the crossing on Witan Way to improve safety and ask that the crossing itself is modified for cyclists, so they do not need to dismount. An improved long-term solution for travel 53

from Witan Way to Corn Street would be welcomed.

Church Lane - Oxford Hill – Madley Park

The Town Council welcomes the inclusion of a toucan crossing at Oxford Hill, the upgrading of gravel tracks to laid foot/cycle paths and the increased lighting in certain stretches of this section.

Consideration should be given to a 20mph zone in the vicinity of King George’s Field to Judd’s Close as this stretch of road is well- used route for Wood Green School students. The route is likely to become used even further with the development in east Witney. There would also be some benefit in bringing the cycle crossing point to as near as possible to Church Lane it would almost be straight across the road. The Town Council also feels that priority for lighting priority needs to be by the allotment gardens, between the bridges for night-time security as the footpath away from buildings near the wooded area will not be as safe, even if lit.

Here are some notes of a conversation I have had with Corn Street resident [name redacted] on the Active Travel scheme.

• 20mph on Corn Street will need enforcement as speeding is currently a problem on the wider part of the road. Speed bumps? Cllr Duncan Enright • Resident parking is in very short supply, and anything that can be done to expand that would be Witney East welcome. This may be possible with reduced traffic. West Oxon District and • Will the cycle lanes be on both sides of Corn Street? Hope so. Witney Town Councils • There is a particular problem with cycling, particularly by young people, on the pavement on the south side. Is there a simple barrier and sign (or surface colour) solution to make this less of a desire line at The Crofts and Ducklington Lane? • Will the one-way speed traffic up? See first point. • The connection from Duckington Lane cycle and footpath is welcome, but could care be taken to encourage use of the cycle lane on Corn Street rather than the pavement?

Witney Emergency Active Travel Fund Phase 2 (EATF2) Witney Active Travel Scheme

Stagecoach in Oxfordshire Comments

1. General comments

Stagecoach in principle welcomes and supports robustly-conceived measures to facilitate greater use of sustainable modes and damp and reverse the secular growth in car-borne traffic, with all the negative implications this presents to society and the environment.

It is essential that these interventions serve to address the real problem: excessive car dependence. Whatever the short-term issues for public transport presented by COVID, at no stage has Government indicated that it sees that it or local government should seek to reduce the use of public transport in the medium of longer-term. In fact, the Government made clear in March 2020 that it sees no credible way to address the carbon impacts of transport without a substantial mode shift towards public transport. For this to Stagecoach Oxfordshire happen, public transport must be a more attractive and relevant choice. Bus Operator EATF measures proposed by Oxfordshire County Council have been explicitly couched in terms of reducing the number of public transport trips “especially for shorter journeys”. No evidence of any kind has been presented by the Council as to the number of such trips that it wishes to divert from public transport to cycling, nor why this is seen as being beneficial, to meeting wider Council goals or indeed to supporting the achievement of wider adopted Council policies. The Company finds this both perplexing and somewhat disturbing.

We consider this aspect of the narrative being advanced to justify the measures proposed here and elsewhere, are illogical, unsubstantiated, inappropriate, and unhelpful in securing the changes that the Council wishes to see as indeed broadly do we. It ought to be quite obvious to professional officers within the Council, and to elected members, that successful achievement of an objective to reduce public transport use would only cause the erosion of levels of service available, since there is no funding offered by the Council to support uncommercial services under normal circumstances by the Council, nor by Government. Reductions in patronage, in the absence of the current COVID-related support, will inevitably lead to service reductions, measured in terms of frequency of service and/or network density. Should this unavoidably take place in future, the implication of the 55

statements made on behalf of the Council in this consultation, would be that it would stand behind these decisions and, indeed publicly applaud them, on the basis that this would be likely to reduce the level of public transport use into the future. Naturally, in the face of both national and local policy, most rational people would consider such a position to be utterly perverse.

Whether reducing public transport use would actually lead to an increase in cycling or, for that matter, walking, is highly questionable. In fact, the evidence is overwhelming that it would only push people towards personal motorised transportation. Whilst effective measures to greatly improve conditions for walking and cycling are to be applauded, not least where they make it easier and more convenient to access high quality public transport, we consider that the Council’s rationale, and design criteria for permanent measures on the highway must ensure that the Council’s actions are always credibly evidence-based, consistent with both its own policies, and compliant with national policies.

We are concerned in this case, that the measures proposed are to benefit cycles only. There is no attempt to improve conditions for walking. On the contrary, many of the off-road measures proposed will introduce shared-use cycling and pedestrian facilities, to provide a strategic east-west cycling provision intentionally albeit implicitly directed at regular longer-distance cross-town movements, and certainly not recreational or, for that matter “family” cycling. This kind of cycling activity, to offer a relevant travel choice, needs to be undertaken at considerable speed: certainly in excess of 15 mph. The very likely increased use of e-bikes as well as other forms of powers micro-mobility on this route, is likely to make conditions for walking on the off- road sections increasingly hazardous. Many of the sections of path of highway identified for improved shared use facilities, are used by Stagecoach passengers walking to existing bus stops. It is quite unclear to us that any thought has been given to the appropriateness of shared use pedestrian and facilities. This is also perplexing and quite troubling. In fact, the cycling lobby has for many years been making the very understandable points, that dedicated off-road cycle facilities should be provided as a matter of first importance, and that shared use off-road facilities are generally both inappropriate and also relatively ineffective in making cycling a high-quality choice.

In 2019, Government itself came to this view through the issuance of Local Transport Technical Note (LTN) 1/20 of June 2020 Cycling Infrastructure Design. The Minister of State makes clear in the Foreword that: “The Government intends that all proposed schemes will be checked by a new inspectorate against the summary principles before funding is agreed, and that finished schemes will be inspected as

appropriate to ensure that they have been delivered in compliance with them. The Department for Transport will also reserve the right to ask for appropriate funding to be returned for any schemes built in a way which is not consistent with the guidance. In short, schemes which do not follow this guidance will not be funded.”

This is clear and stark.

Core design principle 2 is as follows: “Cycles must be treated as vehicles and not as pedestrians. On urban streets, cyclists must be physically separated from pedestrians and should not share space with pedestrians. Shared use routes away from streets may be appropriate in locations such as canal towpaths, paths through housing estates, parks and other green spaces, including in cities…. Where cycle routes use such paths in built-up areas, you should try to separate them from pedestrians, perhaps with levels or a kerb.” (our emphasis). It is clear that the Witney EATF2 scheme is a strategic cycle scheme, designed for use by large numbers of cyclists who will want to make maximum rate of progress. The scheme is direct and will provide an attractive and highly legible cross-town route, linking major residential and employment areas across the town centre, and to each other. The alignment is matched in its efficacy for cycle by benign gradients, flowing the Madley Brook valley bottom and crossing the Windrush flood plain. It conforms in so many important respects respect closely with the LTN 1/20 principles. It could be expected to attract a significant amount of use, therefore.

However, it must also be remembered that the links targeted for cycling improvements are attractive to pedestrians for not dissimilar reasons, and this should be enhanced by the Council’s investments, not jeopardised. Many of these pedestrians are accessing bus stops on Newlands, at the Church Lane stops near The Griffin public house. This is a very important pair of stops served by every significant bus route in the District. They are at a clear node, where the proposed strategic cycle route and other important active travel links, many of them historic, converge.

As such, in addition to considering the needs of cyclists, it is essential that the scheme should also be considering the needs of pedestrians many of whom are also bus users. Too often the scheme merely creates shared off-road cycle provision that, if it does attract cycles, is likely to make the link greatly less attractive to pedestrians, effecting displacing them from the route. This outcome would be highly retrograde.

As a general principle we would urge that investment is focused on providing the high quality segregated cycle provision that LTN 1/20 demands, in place of shared use facilities. This is especially achievable north of Newlands towards Madley Park given that two parallel paths could be implemented: one for cycles west of the Madley Brook, and one for pedestrians to the east, at relatively little cost. We do not understand why this has been missed, in particular from Newlands/Oxford Hill to Court Gardens. This implies the delivery of a 4m wide, bidirectional dedicated facility, paved and lit to LTN 1/20 standards between Oxford Hill and Northfield Farm Lane via Woodbank. It looks conceivable that this could extend further to Madley Park Drive. The relevance to school aged children would be exceptionally high, as no doubt the existing parallel pedestrian provision already is. To maintain a continuous direct pedestrian link a new pedestrian facility should be created east of the brook between Court Gardens and Park View Court- a distance of perhaps 200m at most, with physical barriers to prevent cycling.

Signage and appropriate physical measures to dissuade pedestrian use should be put in place. While some limited shared use links to create connections to adjoining culs-de sac could be provided these should also allow safe use by cycles and pedestrians, and if segregated facilities could be provided they probably should be, as Government now expects as a matter of principle. Where the budget is insufficient for this we would urge that a “cascade principle” is adopted, to install as much of this as possible, particularly between Madley Park and Newlands, allowing CIL or s106 funding, including that to be provided by the East of Witney SDA, to properly address other links south of Oxford Hill and Newlands, that will also directly benefit committed development. We also regret that inter-modality with bus at Newlands/Church Lane has been entirely missed by the scheme designers and promoters. This is really quite disappointing, and shows an inappropriately excessive cycle-centric mindset that has little if any regard for other sustainable modes. Provision of a greater number of secure cycle racks to serve these stops, particularly for those travelling in the Oxford direction from origins north of Newlands, ought to be investigated.

2. The Scheme Proposals

Following these over-arching points we comments on the specific scheme proposals.

2.1. Tower Hill

Widen northern path and create an off-road, shared-use path for both pedestrians and cyclists. 58

Stagecoach supports the intent, but as we state above, we dispute that a shared use facility will now qualify for government funding or properly achieve the Council’s objectives.

Upgrade existing signalised crossing north of the Cemetery to a toucan crossing to allow people cycling to cross the road on their bike. Stagecoach supports this measure.

2.2. Five Ways roundabout

Widen path and create an off-road, shared-use path on the northern side between Tower Hill and Corn Street for both walking and cycling. Stagecoach strongly supports the overall approach to provide an off-road facility around the roundabout. However we would urge that a segregated approach is taken if at all possible, in line with LTN 1/20. If this is not immediately achievable we suggest that this element is worked up for subsequent funding by other streams, including CIL.

Widen the refuge islands on Tower Hill, Welch Way and Corn Street arms of the roundabout to provide more space for people walking and cycling waiting to cross. Stagecoach supports this proposal.

2.3. Corn Street (from Five Ways roundabout to Holloway Road)

On-road advisory cycle lanes (dashed cycle lane road markings) in both directions, with a buffer zone where the cycle lane passes on-street parking to protect cyclists from motor vehicle doors opening. Stagecoach has no objection to this proposal, subject to the reduction of overall vehicular traffic on Corn Street in line with proposal 4.

Review motor vehicle parking timings, locations and number of spaces; review road markings; remove road centre line marking and introduce a 20mph speed limit to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed and increase awareness of on-road cycling. Stagecoach has no objection in principle to this, but we would urge on-going dialogue with us. Without specific proposals to examine it is impossible to ascertain if unforeseen problems might arise. We wonder if enforcing this will prove difficult at this end of Corn Street which is quite wide and where the built environment will sit a significant distance back from the residual vehicular carriageway.

2.4. Corn Street (from Holloway Road to Market Square)

We recognise the inherent conflicts in Corn Street as it narrows towards the Market Place, as the consultation highlights. Creation of an eastbound bus and cycle only lane along Corn Street from Holloway Road to Market Square. All buildouts will be reviewed and adjusted or removed and parking, loading and stopping will not be permitted in the bus and cycle lane to allow continuous priority for buses and cyclists. Parking, loading and stopping will still be possible on the southside of Corn Street in the westbound direction from Market Square. Naturally, Stagecoach would lend its strongest support to these proposals. Frontage access will still be maintained to all premises.

Preventing vehicular access to the southern end of Holloway Road. Walking and cycling will be possible between Holloway Road and Corn Street. Stagecoach has no particular objection to his proposal, though we struggle to see what the practical benefit of it would be.

A new zebra crossing on Corn Street at Marlborough Lane to replace the build outs. Stagecoach supports this proposal, which will improve conditions for pedestrians generally including bus passengers reaching the stops on Corn Street.

20mph speed limit to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed and create a better environment for walking and cycling, including for trips to school and shopping. Stagecoach has no particular objection to his proposal.

2.5. Market Square

20mph speed limit including 20mph roundels (symbols) on the road to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed and make the paths and roads more pleasant and safer for walking and cycling. Stagecoach supports this proposal.

2.6. Langdale Gate

On-road advisory cycle lanes (dashed cycle lane road markings); review road markings; remove road centre 60

line marking and introduce a 20mph speed limit to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed and increase awareness of on-road cycling. Stagecoach has no particular objection to his proposal. This approach is consistent with proposals west of Market Square. It also is appropriate having regard to the level of activity in the area and its wider character.

2.7. Witan Way Roundabout

Off-road, shared-use path on northwest corner between Langdale Gate and Witan Way for walking and cycling. An off-road route is proposed to provide a safe route for people who prefer not to cycle on the road. Widen the refuge islands on Langdale Gate and Witan Way to provide more space for people walking and cycling waiting to cross. Stagecoach has no particular objection to his proposal. In line with our overarching comments however, we would urge that serious attempts are made to identify a segregated solution. It should be stressed that this at this point on the route the more attractive eastern end of the project approaches the town centre and crosses Witan Way which is a major north-south vehicular route. It is entirely appropriate that the design recognises this and is rather more ambitious in what it is seeking to deliver, including a signalised Toucan crossing, for example.

2.8. Langel Common from Witan Way to Church Lane

The path from Witan Way to Church Lane across Langel Common and the River Windrush is already a segregated path for walking and cycling. Minor measures to improve the existing path and consider whether more lighting is needed are proposed. This link warrants much more ambition. It is a potentially highly attractive route following a desire line that with the right investments in a lit, fully-segregated cycle link could assist in reducing local vehicular traffic that currently places chronic pressure on the Bridge Street and Newlands area, causing multiple serious problems, among them, serious delay and unreliability for bus services. Improvement of this link directly relates to mitigation measures that are otherwise justified to support development at the East of Witney Strategic Development Area. There should be clarity about the apportionment of costs and the timescales involved. It may prove appropriate to progress an initial phase of improvements such as lighting as part of this scheme in advance of much more comprehensive works funded by developer contributions and/or CIL.

2.9. Church Lane

20mph speed limit to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed and increase awareness of on-road cycling; carriageway patching where necessary. These measures are clearly justified and appropriate. There may be a case for a higher level of investment in surface rehabilitation.

2.10. Oxford Hill junction with Church Lane

Upgrade existing zebra crossing to a toucan crossing with connecting shared-use paths between the Church Lane and the Madley Park path. The existing and potential function of this location as a key node and potential inter-modal focus has been entirely overlooked, showing that the project has been conceived with insufficient regard for context or wider policy. Stagecoach supports the very limited proposals for this area, which entirely lack vision or ambition and fail to take advantage of the opportunity to provide much more attractive access to most of the District’s main bus services, including those that will see a step change in provision and quality in due course when the County’s A40 Strategy is implemented by 2024. At this stage opportunities should be taken to maximise the amount of secure cycle parking in the vicinity of the bus stops, and consider how integration between bus, walking and cycling can be optimised, granted that there are significant constraints on the site.

2.11. Oxford Hill to Courts Gardens (path to Madley Park)

This section of the route was improved when Madley Park was built, we therefore propose minor measures to improve the existing path including considering whether more lighting is needed. As we outline above, the entire stretch north of Oxford Hill/Newlands needs to seek to provide a dedicated segregated cycle provision to maximise the attractiveness of both active travel modes. It is relevant to recall that Madley Park and immediately adjacent smaller land parcels built between 2001 and 2011 account for in excess of 1150 homes, the vast majority of which are well beyond 400m of the main public transport corridor on Oxford Hill, and a significant number are beyond reasonably comfortable walking distances. It is entirely appropriate that the Council should be looking among other things, at enhancing both pedestrian and cycling connectivity to this corridor, with this in view.

2.12. Courts Garden to Park View Court (path to Madley Park)

This section of the route was improved when Madley Park was built, we therefore propose minor measures to improve the existing path including considering whether more lighting is needed. We consider that a parallel pedestrian facility is needed to fill the gap on the east side of the Madley Brook releasing the route west of the brook for a dedicated cycle provision. The proposals do not comply with LTN 01/20 in their current form.

2.13. Park View Court to Woodbank (path to Madley Park)

This section of the path is not currently a cycle route, we therefore propose to create a new off-road, shared- use path including considering whether more lighting is needed so that the path matches the standard of the newer sections. Again, investment to ensure the provision provides a dedicated cycling facility is required.

2.14. Woodbank to footbridge over Madley Brook:

This section of path has been left unfinished following the Madley Park and Woodbank developments. We seek to improve the surface and make it a shared-use path; ensure the bridge over the stream is safe for people walking and cycling by installing a new handrail; consider whether more lighting is needed. This we take to be the very short section at the south end of Woodbank, that was separately consented from the Madley Park Development. Again this link should be provided to provide segregated cycle facilities, as it is on the main line of the proposed cycle provision from the Madley Park Local centre to the key bus stops on Oxford Hill as well as the town centre beyond.

2.15. Woodbank

Informal on-road route; 20mph speed limit to create a core walking and cycling route from Madley Park and the schools, to Oxford Hill and the town centre. We support this proposal. As a quiet cul-de sac we struggle to see how vehicular speeds practically would exceed 30 mph in any case.

2.16. Woodbank to Wood Green School Entrance

This route used to carry some motor vehicles; however, a new road has been provided through Madley Park making this a quiet lane for walking and cycling. Minor measures to improve the existing path including considering whether more lighting is needed; bollards and signing are proposed. We support this proposal.

We believe the current guidance applicable to this scheme and Witney in general is Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 1/20. Where the design has to be compromised in the short term it should aim to best meet the recommendations in this guidance. We believe other guidance, say for designing shared use routes such as CD 143 - Designing for walking, cycling and horse-riding applies to the strategic road network and does not apply in Witney.

Windrush Bike Project has written separately to the Cabinet Member for Environment about the time constraints adversely affecting the design of this scheme. We are very much in favour of this scheme in principle but there are parts that we do not support as proposed. This response is to the scheme as proposed, understanding that much of the detail has yet to be designed.

We are in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limits: the whole of Madley Park including Woodbank; Church Lane; Langdale Gate; Church Green and down to Station Lane including The Leys; Upper High Windrush Bike Project Street; Welch Way from the High Street to Woodford Way; Corn Street and all its side roads. This is a good first step.

People whose journey includes Curbridge Road, Tower Hill (beyond the crossing leading to Smiths Estate), and Welch Way, will still be cycling on the carriageway at Fiveways roundabout. Windrush Bike Project have personal experience of people being knocked off of their bikes at this roundabout - it is a known hazard - and this scheme does nothing to address that.

1. Tower Hill: We are concerned about how wide the pavement can be made approaching the crossing. It should aim to comply with Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 1/20.

Cycling into town people have the choice to cycle on the road from the crossing and rejoin the path at Beech Road, however, cycling uphill, with shopping, reaching the button at the far side of the stop and turning to

cycle across could be a difficult manoeuvre for some.

The barriers alongside the cemetery leading to Fettiplace Road need to be removed to allow access for larger cycles and mobility scooters.

2. Five Ways roundabout: In our view the existing crossing on Corn Street is not suitable for off-carriageway cycling. The road layout and the position of the crossing mean it is difficult for people cycling to decide if it is safe to cross. We suggest moving the crossing further from the roundabout and making it a Parallel Crossing.

We suggest improving the service to active travellers by installing a Parallel Crossing on Welch Way as well. Where possible make the approach to the crossings perpendicular to the road to improve visibility of approaching traffic.

Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 1/20 section 10.4.12 states "Parallel crossings can be used on links and on the arms of priority-controlled and roundabout junctions."

We suggest consideration be given to making the southern side of Corn Street near Fiveways shared use with a dropped kerb access to allow people cycling to avoid the buses parked in the bus stop awaiting a driver changeover. We suggest checking with Stagecoach whether it is always one bus parked at the bus stop or if it is often two.

3. Corn Street (from Five Ways roundabout to Holloway Road): Advisory cycle lanes should comply with Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 1/20 to be inclusive. It is not clear how advisory cycle lanes will work with the bus stops.

4. Corn Street (from Holloway Road to Market Square): Subject to the views of residents in the Corn Street area we support the change to one-way except bus and cycle and the change to Holloway Road access. (Corn Street was closed at Market Square to all motor traffic for over a week during the consultation.)

We support the zebra crossing by Marlborough Lane.

We are concerned that removing the build-outs will increase speeds with one-way traffic. If the build-outs are removed the bike parking in that section of Corn Street will be lost and needs to be replaced. Also a zebra crossing will be required at the Market Place end to allow people to cross there easily. One of our directors remembers the traffic and how difficult it used to be to cross before the build-outs went in - clearly they were put there for a reason.

If the build-outs remain we suggest changing the current priorities so that buses and cycles going against the one-way flow have priority.

We are disappointed that there is not time to adequately investigate creating cycle tracks between Marlborough Lane and The Crofts and Holloway Road. The wide pavements are likely to be used for eating out and children attending Batts School would be more likely to use those tracks than an advisory cycle lane on the road. As it stands they will likely continue to cycle on the pavement.

5. Market Square: Nothing to add.

6. Langdale Gate: In our view the cycle route should be signed along Crown Lane to avoid confusion about legality. It is a footpath with a history of use as a cycle route rather than a footway. We suggest the cycle route rejoins the carriageway at the entrance to Langdale Hall car park as the least worst option.

Although the pavement from the carpark entrance to Market Square is wide, people walking and cycling are unsighted at the corner by the zebra crossing so we do not think that shared use is appropriate there.

It's not clear how advisory cycle lanes will remain useful where there is currently a bus stop on the southern side and informal disabled parking on the double yellow lines on the northern side.

Advisory cycle lanes should comply with Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 1/20 to be inclusive.

There is a desire line for people crossing the road by the toilets. We suggest a zebra crossing here would help people to cross and perhaps help reduce speeds.

7. Witan Way Roundabout: As well as widening and deepening the refuge island we suggest removing 4-5m of hedging next to the stone wall of the car park and resurfacing it to create more space for people.

Also a cycling connection to the leisure centre is needed.

8. Langel Common from Witan Way to Church Lane: This section of path already gets congested. We suggest increasing the width where it isn’t constrained by at least 1m to make walking more relaxed. This would include widening the bridges when they reach the end of their service life.

9. Church Lane: Nothing to add.

10. Oxford Hill junction with Church Lane: We support upgrading the crossing.

11. Oxford Hill to Courts Gardens (path to Madley Park): The dogleg leading to the bridge across Madley Brook is difficult to negotiate. Negotiating the lip onto the bridge at such an acute angle has caused people to fall in wet conditions. Given that and the narrow gap leading to Oxford Hill it's not clear why the track from Woodbank can't be upgraded all the way to Oxford Hill to help reduce congestion along this section.

12. Courts Garden to Park View Court (path to Madley Park): There is a significant sharp hump that has appeared across the path alongside the allotments in this section and users would benefit from 'smoothing' this out. We support route lighting.

13. Park View Court to Woodbank (path to Madley Park): We support resurfacing and upgrading the path with lighting.

14. Woodbank to footbridge over Madley Brook: We support upgrading the path with lighting for shared use.

15. Woodbank: We suggest the barriers at the western end of Woodbank are rearranged so larger cycles and mobility scooters can pass without having to run on the grass. A gap of 1.5m would be ideal but 1.3m would suffice.

16. Woodbank to Wood Green School Entrance: The southern half of this section is very rough and needs improving to make it smooth to ride on up to where it meets the shared path leading to Cedar Drive. Barriers currently prevent access for larger cycles and mobility scooters to the shared path alongside Madley Brook and Springfield School leading to Cedar Drive. We suggest these barriers are removed.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this scheme. Sustrans is the charity making it easier for people to walk and cycle, and custodians of the National Cycle Network.

Background - National Cycle Network Route 57

NCN route 57 runs from Northleach in Gloucestershire, broadly following the A40 corridor/Windrush Valley, to Witney, Oxford, Thame and Welwyn Garden City.

The route is open and signposted west of Witney (Deer Park Road). However, there is a gap in the route through Witney itself and on to Oxford, due to the current lack of suitable safe infrastructure. The WItney Sustrans North & West Active Travel Scheme could provide a way to fill this gap - it is with that in mind that these comments are Oxfordshire group made.

Sustrans' approach to the National Cycle Network is set out in the 'Paths for Everyone' vision: https://www.sustrans.org.uk/about-us/paths-for-everyone

"Be traffic-free or a quiet-way: Where the National Cycle Network is not traffic-free it should either be on a quiet-way section of road or be fully separated from the adjacent carriageway. For Network route on a quiet- way section of road, the traffic speed and flows should be sufficiently low. It should have good visibility to comply with design guidance for comfortable sharing of the carriageway."

For on-road sections, the applicable design guide is LTN 1/20. A fully LTN 1/20-compliant scheme is more likely to be adopted as part of the National Cycle Network.

Our working corridor assumption has been that NCN 57 will run from its current terminus at the northern end of Deer Park Road, across Witney town centre, to Cogges / Shores Green, from where it will continue to Oxford. We therefore seek an attractive, efficient and (above all) safe route through the town centre. The most obvious candidate is via Tower Hill, Corn Street and Church Lane - in other words, the route of this scheme.

However, as part of the Paths for Everyone evidence base, Sustrans assessed Corn Street (as a potential route for NCN 57) for traffic levels, speed, and safety. The resulting overall score was "Very Poor", confirming that it is not currently suited to form part of the NCN. The scheme will need to address this if NCN 57 is to be designated here.

Detailed comments

1: Tower Hill

We welcome the proposal for a shared-use cycleway.

This section is approached from a shared-use path from Fettiplace Road, which is currently poorly maintained and narrow. In particular, the barriers on this path must be removed to be accessible to more types of cycle.

2: Five Ways roundabout

This is a modest improvement on the present situation but falls short of safe roundabout designs being introduced elsewhere (e.g. Manchester, Cambridge), which is disappointing given the large junction footprint.

With this proposed design, the main challenge will be to ensure safe sightlines when crossing Corn Street and Welch Way - particularly for cyclists heading west (from Corn Street).

The connection to Ducklington Lane is important, particularly if NCN 57 is eventually routed that way (see below), and we ask that the final designs give consideration to the safety of cyclists approaching from this direction.

3/4: Corn Street

Corn Street is at present the most difficult road for cycling and, as such, the section most crucial to identifying the route of NCN 57.

There is up to 24m of available streetspace between building frontages here, narrowing to 10m at the eastern (Market Square) end. As such, there is an opportunity here to provide safe, protected space for cycling.

The current proposals, which only offer advisory cycle lanes, fall short of this. This does not appear to comply with LTN 1/20 which says (6.4.9) that "Advisory lanes should only be used when limitations on the overall space available mean that motor vehicles will sometimes need to enter the cycle lane" - a 24m street does not meet "limitations on the overall space".

The proposals do not commit to removing on-street parking spaces. Witney has seen a major increase in parking provision in recent years, including 590 (free) spaces at Marriott's Close. Retaining the full ~80 spaces on Corn Street inevitably compromises the space available provided for cycling. Sustrans believes that "one of the best approaches to make walking, cycling and public transport more attractive is to remove on-street parking and put our kerb space to more productive uses" (https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our- blog/opinion/2018/october/our-city-centre-parking-problem).

Retaining westbound traffic between Market Square and Holloway Road will result in significant continuing

traffic flow. The INRIX data used in our Paths for Everyone assessment scored traffic on this stretch at a very high level (14). Even halving this would still put it significantly above other parts of NCN 57 in West Oxfordshire (typically 1 to 6).

As it stands, then, these proposals look unlikely to bring Corn Street traffic down to a level appropriate for a 'Paths for Everyone'-quality NCN route.

Two modifications to the scheme could improve this.

• Closure to both eastbound and westbound motor traffic between Holloway Road and Market Place (retaining cycle and bus access). The businesses at the eastern end of Corn Street are predominantly estate agents and takeaways. There is currently no on-street parking. There is no compelling reason why through motor traffic needs to be retained here. Restricting this section to pedestrians, cyclists and buses would make this narrower section safer in itself, and by eliminating through traffic, would cut traffic levels along the entirety of Corn Street. It would be consistent with the similar restrictions on Market Square / High Street and help to cement Corn Street as part of the town centre. • Provision of protected cycle space west of Holloway Road. Removing some of the on-street parking would make space available for safe, protected cycle lanes.

We understand that OCC is concerned that funding deadlines make segregated options difficult (FAQ 12: "If the scheme timeframes had been longer than a few months we may have had time to explore this type of design issue in more detail"). As such, you may want to prioritise the eastbound/westbound closure of Holloway Road and Market Place. This has few additional infrastructure or design costs, and could cut through traffic levels on the remainder of Corn Street to such a level that a 'quiet way' treatment without segregation would become viable.

As the scheme stands, it seems possible that NCN 57 will need to follow a route via Ducklington Lane, the Leys, and Church Green - less direct, but safer. This would be a missed opportunity.

5/6/7: Market Square / Langdale Gate / Witan Way roundabout

As with Corn Street, the advisory cycle lanes offer only weak protection and may not be compliant with LTN

1/20.

Safety on Market Square and Langdale Gate is largely governed by traffic volume and speed. Again, if westbound motor traffic is permitted on Corn Street, this will result in continuing high flows of traffic along Langdale Gate. Closing Corn Street to westbound traffic will have a beneficial knock-on effect here.

We welcome the off-road alternative at the Witan Way roundabout. We would ask you to take note of the comments made by our local volunteer Kevin Hickman in the Windrush Bike Project's submission, which point out the opportunity of using Crown Lane as a safe traffic-free alternative.

8/9/10: Langel Common / Church Lane

This is already a good quality cycle route and the minor improvements are welcome. We would suggest constructing a small ramp from Church Lane to Wadards Meadow, which would provide a safer route to Shores Green (for the A40 cycleway) as an alternative to the very busy Oxford Hill.

11-16: Madley Park

These are not on the projected corridor for NCN 57, but are clearly very welcome improvements for local travel. Together they will provide a safe, traffic-free link to NCN route 442 at North Leigh/Hanborough.

I am writing to comment on the proposal for an active travel corridor in Witney. I am a District Councillor and the WODC Cycling Champion. I have therefore had some input into the response you will be receiving separately from WODC – however, my comments and those of WODC may differ in some respects.

Cllr Dan Levy, WODC My comments are largely objecting to what has been proposed. Cycling Champion This has been a missed opportunity to make a much larger change to the transport infrastructure in Witney, which could have led to a huge take up of cycling, walking and other active travel in the town and its surrounds. As it is, what has been proposed will not have a large effect because a. It leaves key parts of the corridor as unsafe or indirect. A cycle scheme is only as good as its weakest parts

b. It fails to fit into a wider network of active travel routes and thus is very limited in who it would have value to c. It is being rushed through to ensure completion by the end of March 2021. It isn’t entirely clear why this urgency is being imposed on the project, but it precludes proper discussion, better planning, and more radical measures, for example to make the key junctions workable. d. In several places the scheme works only for people heading in one direction and not in the other. Unless people can feel safe and can travel directly in both directions, a large number will be put off. e. There are places where only confident or experienced cyclists will be able to negotiate the route without dismounting (and in some cases will do so by sticking to the main carriageway). A cycle scheme like this must work to encourage people who currently do not cycle - this scheme does not achieve that objective. There are some commendable features about the scheme, notably that attention is being given to active travel at all and the improvement of the surfaces of the cycle/pedestrian track to the east of Newland/Oxford Road.

In a number of key areas the level of detail given is insufficient fully to assess what the facility will look like and how it will work in practice. For instance, there is a suggestion of a “review” of parking arrangements in an area in which the presence or otherwise of parking will make a material difference to the ability to provide an adequately wide cycle lane and to the quantum of motor traffic in the area. This isn’t acceptable as a way of delivering the benefits of active travel to residents and businesses in Witney, nor of getting value for money from the investment.

Comments on specific areas, starting from the northwest, and numbered in accordance with the proposal’s numbering scheme. 2. Fiveways roundabout. a. There is no improvement at all for bikes coming from Curbridge Road. b. The mechanism for a cyclist to get round the roundabout from Tower Hill isn’t clear. Assuming that the preferred route is off the carriageway we can expect it to be laborious and slow, and potentially still unsafe as people cross moving traffic. Any need to dismount and wait for the traffic lights will be unwelcoming. c. The arrangements for cyclists heading north on Corn Street heading for Tower Hill are unclear.

It would appear that the choice is between remaining on the carriageway (as now – no improvement) or crossing Corn St onto the shared path on the opposite side of the road. This would be inconvenient and potentially dangerous, and would then be followed by the requirement to cross Tower Hill. Both options will discourage the very new and inexperienced cyclists that this scheme ought to be aimed at. 3. Corn Street a. Corn Street will only be more attractive than now if there is less motor traffic and with the road being wide enough to have a separate bike lane. b. This will require a review of parking arrangements now, not after the implementation of the scheme. c. Bikes must have priority over side roads. d. A 20mph speed limit would be appropriate along Corn St. 4. Corn Street South. a. The Corn Street/Market Square area is intimidating. The currently narrowed section does not work for any road users. b. Ideally, there would be no motor vehicles allowed to use it at all, other than buses and perhaps deliveries. There is always alternative access routes for motor vehicles. c. Of the inadequate options offered, restricting motor traffic to one direction only would be the least objectionable. Bikes should either have priority or have a separate lane for going the opposite way to motor vehicles (as is currently the case on Station Lane by the church). d. Traffic restrictions need to be enforced, and ANPR cameras should be in place.

5. Market Square a. There is no description of how this would work. The current arrangements can be intimidating, with motor vehicles approaching from each direction. b. If people are going to be encouraged to travel actively, they need to feel safe. I would suggest ensuring as little motor traffic here as possible – this could be achieved in part by making Church Green car free (which would also encourage pupils to walk or cycle or scoot to Henry Box School). We should aspire to Henry Box achieving similar proportions of active travel as the exceptional Cherwell School in Oxford. 74

c. High St must remain car free as per the current temporary arrangements. 6. Langdale Gate a. As designed (and especially as there may be additional motor traffic displaced from Corn Street) Langdale Gate will be intimidating for inexperienced people on bicycles. b. It would have been better to create a route through the carparks. This alternative would also make it easier to redesign the crossing of Witan Way. c. Presumably this was considered but rejected mainly on the basis that it could not be delivered within the artificially short timescale. 7. Witan Way roundabout. a. It is very hard to see how this is intended to work. Minor changes will not make this junction safe for people on bikes. There needs to be easy and safe crossing of Witan Way, and the suggested removal of some kerbs will be insufficient. b. The current bike track to the south of Witan Way emerges too close to the roundabout to make a crossing feasible here. Any option involving a refuge in the middle of the road will be insufficiently large to make it safe for many users, and will still involve dismounting and managing moving motor vehicles. There is a high volume of traffic on Witan Way, occasionally interrupted by the pelican crossing outside Waitrose. c. The obvious solution is to separate the junction and the roundabout and to put traffic signals in place – this would best be achieved by moving the roundabout a significant distance to the west. d. In practice I would expect a number of active travellers to opt for the signallised crossing along Witan Way, outside Waitrose. In turn this will mean active travellers mixing with pedestrians on pedestrian only facilities. 11. Crossing Oxford Road. a. This has not been given appropriate treatment. Retaining the existing crossing requires people on bikes to dismount, to mingle with pedestrians on a pavement, and to cross an active road if heading east. As in other areas of the proposal, requiring dismounting creates an unnecessary obstacle to people using bikes. b. The should be a crossing using conventional traffic lights governing traffic on Church Road and Newland/Oxford Road. These should be triggered by the presence of a bicycle. No dismount or

change of bicycle direction should be required. 12+ There needs to be proper surfacing of the eastern section of the scheme, with excellent drainage. The route should have lighting to permit its use in hours of darkness.

Oxfordshire County Council - Witney Active Travel Scheme Consultation

Thank you for consulting West Oxfordshire District Council on your proposed Witney Active Travel Scheme.

We welcome measures which will help make the town a safer place to cycle and walk which are thoughtfully designed taking into account functional requirements and the historic character of the town centre.

We do however have strong reservations regarding many of the key elements proposed in this scheme and we do not consider it appropriate to implement significant measures such as the closures of roads. Measures such as these need to be carefully considered to fully understand the potential implications to local residents and businesses and should be subject to thorough consultation and local engagement. West Oxfordshire

District Council, Giles Given the short term timescales involved in this project it is not possible to consult extensively and therefore Hughes, Chief it is necessary to focus on shorter term minor measures such as the rationalisation of signage and Executive. resurfacing which can be implemented quickly and which will help support more comprehensive works as they come forward at a later stage. It is therefore important that these measures feed into the overall strategy for cycling in Witney which will incorporate longer term and more substantial measures.

We wish to make the following detailed comments in response to the consultation. The comments have been divided into various headings as set out below to assist you:

General observation regarding signage We wish to highlight the importance of considering the historic environment in assessing the design and location of proposed cycle signage, particularly in the Conservation Area. Additional signage should be kept to a minimum and existing signage should rationalised and improved where possible. We agree that road traffic signs should be reviewed to redirect vehicles to more appropriate routes, including 76

revisiting signage to Cogges Farm disabled parking area from Newland.

20mph Limit Whilst we support the principle of implementing a 20mph limit where speeds need to be reduced, we question whether it is necessary to introduce a 20mph limit in the area surrounding Church Lane as traffic speeds are so low. We suggest that the speed limit is focussed on Church Lane only where speeds are higher and it will avoid additional signage around Cogges Manor Farm, potentially harming its historic setting.

We suggest that a plan detailing the extent of the 20mph speed limit within the town centre would be helpful. The aim should be to balance the advantages of reducing speeds whilst minimising signage and considering the design/ location of signs to conserve and enhance the Conservation Area. Therefore, we should be focusing on the High Street where there are clear benefits to this speed limit.

We have no objection to the 20mph speed limit proposed in the Madley Park area.

Proposal Box – 1. Tower Hill We question whether there is room to widen the northern side of the footpath without affecting the carriageway width? We also need to ensure that the creation of a shared use path isn’t to the detriment of pedestrian safety, particularly bearing in mind the gradient here and the need to consider all users such as those with disabilities. There appears to be scope to tidy the surface detailing in the area around the existing crossing to make it easier for pedestrians and cyclists and to be visually tidier and more logical (Proposal A). The rationalisation of signage and street furniture would be beneficial too. If shared use is possible, additional lines, markings and signs could be avoided.

Proposal Box – 2. Five Ways Roundabout Proposal A: We agree with the proposal to widen the footway and create an off-road shared-use facility on the northern side between Tower Hill and Corn Street for both pedestrians and cyclists.

As a general observation, in our opinion there is at least an equivalent and perhaps stronger ‘gravitational pull’ for cyclists to travel along Welch Way to access the town centre as there is along Corn Street. It’s a level and wide route, it’s less environmentally sensitive and it’s direct, particularly for accessing Marriotts Walk. In addition, there is street space available at the retail end of Welch Way for additional cycle parking, if

required. It may not meet the west-east, one route, criteria but in reality people may not traverse the town in this way.

In terms of Plan 2 which relates to Corn Street, we consider it important to keep new road markings to an absolute minimum necessary to achieve their purpose to respect the character of the street. We question whether it is essential to have a cross-hatched ‘buffer zone’ between parked cars and advisory cycle lane. We consider that one dashed line would be adequate to assist cyclists whilst maintaining the historic character of the street.

Proposal Boxes – 3 & 4. Corn Street from roundabout to Market Square We have fundamental concerns regarding the proposal to create a one-way traffic system along Corn Street and close Holloway Road. These are significant measures which have been subject to minimal consultation. Therefore the potential implications to businesses, local residents and the Batt School have not been properly explored given the limited level of engagement and time to prepare these plans.

Corn Street is a complex area of the town due to the various uses along this stretch including residential, businesses and the secondary school. We need to be completely satisfied that any future measures accommodate access to private residential properties, for refuse vehicles, deliveries for businesses, and school drop-offs. It is therefore vital that measures are practicable in reality and we remain unconvinced that this is the case. Due to the extremely tight timescales of this project, we support minimal interventions at this stage with a view to a more considered, debated, detailed and context sensitive scheme at a later date.

Considering the proposed new zebra crossing adjacent to Marlborough Lane (Proposal D of Box 4), whilst we support measures which will assist those travelling to and from the Batt School on foot and bike, it appears that there may be complications due to existing pinch points and Marlborough Lane junction. We recommend that this should form part of a more comprehensive scheme which aims to reduce traffic levels and speed with measures for more shared space and a safer environment generally. If this is installed, there should be the ability to adjust this in the future as part of a wider project if necessary.

We support the review of existing traffic calming build-outs (Proposal C of Box 4) where they assist cyclists and where these can be adjusted as part of a more comprehensive cycling scheme for Witney. We would welcome further clarification regarding the installation of cross-section D. The principle of taking cycles away from moving traffic is supported but the detail and quality of design and materials is an

important element of this. We would like to reiterate that it is essential to keep new signage and road markings to a minimum in this sensitive location.

We question whether the buffer zone where cycles pass parked cars is necessary and whether other suggested measures could avoid the need for further road markings.

Proposal Box – 5. Market Square/Butter Cross We agree that there should be minimal interventions at this stage pending decisions on the future of the Market Square/Butter Cross area. Any future measures should not compromise the temporary measures to close the High Street until a decision is made on the longer term plans for this area.

Proposal Box – 6. Langdale Gate As a general observation, we suggest that users travelling to the town centre should be encouraged to use the route to the Light Controlled Crossing on Witan Way.

We also suggest that longer term there might be the opportunity to narrow pavements to allow cycle lanes on both sides.

Proposal Box – 7. Witan Way/Langdale Gate Roundabout It would be helpful to include more detail regarding this junction. There may be scope to make the cycle route more dominant through different road surface treatments and kerb details. We also question whether the existing railings could be removed whilst still retaining pedestrian safety to allow a less engineered and visually sensitive solution to be implemented.

In terms of the minor measures proposed across Langel Common, we could like to know more about the details of these given the sensitivity of this area. If these consist of tidying up this area and repair works we are extremely supportive of this but we wish to avoid unnecessary clutter and lighting due to the rural qualities of this pocket of Witney.

Proposal Box – 8. Existing off-road cycle facility from Witan Way and Church Lane WODC has been involved in the Langel Common area for many years in order to protect its special historic character. The ‘Windrush in Witney’ project and our Landscape Management Strategy aim to achieve a co- ordinated approach to the way in which the wider area is managed and to respect the local character. This is

particularly relevant when considering surfacing, street lighting and furniture.

As such, as a Council, we would like to be involved in the details of any future minor measures including lighting. We’d welcome the opportunity to see if we could rationalise ‘new’ street furniture as part of this project. We would however be very concerned if a new design involved coloured surface treatments or markings which we consider would be inappropriate in this context, including along the route past Cogges Manor Farm due to its historic significance.

As above, we also recommend encouraging users to use the route to the light controlled crossing on Witan Way as a means to get to the town centre, rather than on to the Witan Way/Langdale Gate roundabout. This may require some vegetation management along this short section.

Proposal Box – 9. Church Lane We recommend minimal road surface markings and other signage due to the sensitivity of the area around Cogges Farm. Cogges Farm forms a cluster of Listed Buildings and is a Scheduled Ancient Monument situated in the Conservation Area. Traffic and speed levels are currently low so excessive signage/ road marking is not considered necessary and will detract from the character of the area.

Proposal Box - 10. Oxford Hill The area around the Church Lane/Oxford Hill junction requires a comprehensive assessment of solutions to make this safer for pedestrians and cyclists. There are currently many conflicts between vehicles, buses, cyclists and pedestrians. It may well be beyond the scope of this immediate project given the short timescales but we recommend that consideration should be made as to what a future design might entail to alleviate these tensions and to avoid carrying out work that might need to be changed in the future. Slowing through traffic along Oxford Hill, giving a clearer, easier and route for pedestrians and cyclists crossing the road when heading to the town centre should be the ultimate aim.

Oxford Hill to Madley Park We support the measures proposed along this stretch and these will help support future initiatives likely to be brought forward by the East and North Witney Strategic Development Areas.

Conclusion To summarise, we have fundamental concerns regarding some of the key elements of the scheme, with

particular regard to the measures proposed along Corn Street and we do not support these as a Council. Given the extremely tight timescales involved in this project, we do not consider it appropriate to propose significant measures which have not been subject to thorough consultation or local engagement.

We support some of the minor measures proposed as detailed above such as the rationalisation of signage, tidying of street furniture and improvement/ repairs to road surfacing.

We trust you find this response helpful and you are able to take our reservations on board. If you wish to discuss any of the points raised, please feel free to get in touch.

Much of the information needed for meaningful comment has not been provided in these plans. I’ll come back to this point later.

Summary comments. Good points. These plans will cater to help allow for journeys across town using active travel, That said, this should be seen as just a start, as a wider selection of journeys/destinations needs to be catered for. 20 speed limits are good.

Poor points. Information (not) provided, and guidelines used. Cycling UK So much important information is missing from this consultation that it is impossible to ascertain whether it Oxfordshire’s will result in good quality or poor quality infrastructure. Skanska say this is due to “Depth of design has been limited for this project due to the funding program restrictions.” It needs pointing out to the funders who require such a short design/implementation period that there is not enough time to design/implement the scheme to be the best possible, and thus will result in poor value for money

There is far to much shared use (pedestrian – cycle user) provision proposed. Shared use facilities are not popular with pedestrians or cycle users. This unpopularity can be ameliorated by implementing shared use that meets current guidance, or segregated facilities

Where shared use facilities are proposed, the proposed width is either not stated, or is sub standard and fails to meet current guidance on width.

Guidance not met includes DfT LTN 1/20 , LTN 1/12, Oxfordshire LCWIP, Oxfordshire CC Cycling Design Standards. Manual for Streets 2.

The shared use may or may not meet DMRB guidance, but this guidance in inappropriate on these roads. Skanska say the following guidance was used in this design : LTN 1/20 The OCC cycle design standards. DMRB guidance CD 143 - Designing for walking, cycling and horse-riding.

• Why has DMRB been used at all? DMRB guidance should not have been used here. DMRB is intended to be used on Highways England trunk roads (A34, A43, M40 in Oxfordshire). • Why has the local LCWIP not been used?

Cycling UK object to these plans due to the amount of shared use provision planned, and the failure for it to comply with current guidance.

If all shared use paths were 3 – 3.5m shared use or segregated, then the proposals would be acceptable.

More detailed comment.

Good points. 20 limits. Aiming to cater for journeys (rather than doing bits and pieces). Many of the proposals could be good, or they could be very poor and substandard – the information to decide if good or poor is completely lacking from these plans for the most part.

Poor points. Lack of important details in this consultation means we cannot determine the quality of the intended design. Many places have no cycle/pedestrian track dimensions. Many locations on the plans have no dimensions, and the boxes say “..widen path…” “.. widen refuge islands…” widen to how much? Some details might depend on feedback, but with no dimensions, what can be fed back? Too many shared paths – these are unpopular with pedestrians and cycle users alike, especially when they

are too narrow. Where dimensions have been given (2.5m wide), they are too narrow for pleasant use and to meet current guidelines. If any paths a bit vertical edges (fences/walls), then the shared paths are even more too narrow.

All the guidance listed below say 3 or 3.5m for shared use, wider if bounded by a vertical edge (fence/wall).

LCWIP p53 (Oxford) 19.1.1 1) Segregated off road cycle tracks – min width 3m cycle 2m foot way + kerb/verge/median strip. 2) Shared off road cycle tracks – Min width 3.5m “unsuitable unless on low pedestrian flow paths : change to segregated”

Shopping and high pedestrian vol streets. 20 mph limit, on carriageway. Cycle lanes min 1.5 m width <1000cycles/day, 1.8 m width > 1000 cycles/day, min 2m width >10,000 cycles/day

LCWIP Bicester (draft) p21 Widen shared paths to 3.5m width as far as possible. Resurface paths to smooth tarmac.

OCC cycling design standards: Shared paths

3.4.9 Usage should dictate the width of such paths, with 3 metres the recommended width, 2.5 metres the minimum. Paths wider than 3 metres should normally be segregated rather than shared.

3.4.10 In general, shared paths should not be divided with painted lines. Where these have been provided in the past, they are often ignored by both pedestrians and cycle users and provide little benefit. However, segregation with painted lines can begin to become self-enforcing and have benefit where usage is high.

MfS 2

6.2.10 says see LTN 2/86

LTN 1/12 2012:

6.11 LTN 2/08 gives detailed advice on the geometric design of cycle routes. section 8.5 of LTN 2/08 is now superseded 7.30 Designers should generally aim to provide more than the minimum, regardless of flow rates

7.32 There might be situations, again particularly in rural areas, where flows are so light that the likelihood of two users encountering each other is very low. In this case, the minimum widths given below might be far more than are necessary (or desirable from an environmental point of view). The acceptability of width below the minimum recommended here is something for the designer to determine but, in any case, at the very least two wheelchair users should be able to pass one another, even if this involves the use of passing places.

7.34 A width of 3 metres should generally be regarded as the preferred minimum on an unsegregated route, although in areas with few cyclists or pedestrians a narrower route might suffice. Where a significant amount of two-way cycling is expected, additional width could be required 7.35 Note here that 3 metres is the preferred minimum effective width, and this will be the actual width where the route is not bounded by vertical features (see Figure 7.6).

DMRB. Although this guidance is not intended for roads such as these, DMRB has been used. The guidance for shared use paths in DMRB says: “E/3.5 Widths of unsegregated shared use routes shall be a minimum of: 1) 3.0 metres where there are 200 users an hour or more; or 2) 2.0 metres where there are less than 200 users per hour.”

So if this inappropriate standard was to be used, the proposed 2.5m width only meets DMRB guidance when

less than 200 users per hour. As the proposed facilities serve local schools, there will almost certainly be more than 200 users/hour at the start/end of the school day. Roads get designed to meet peak flow, cycle/pedestrian facilities should be the same in this regard.

Witney.

Options Overview Plan Sheet 1 of 4 : Box 1. Tower Hill. “Widen northern path” how wide will this shared path be? The cross section A drawing (on drawing 2) has no scale, the shared use path needs good width to allow 0.5m for the restricting wall Upgrade to toucan crossing good. Google satellite view suggests a width of 2 – 2.5m (bounded by a vertical fence/wall, so subtract 0.5m), and this width narrows as you go from Beech Road towards the signalled crossing further up the hill.

Box 2. Five Ways Roundabout Proposal A Widen path – to what width? (not stated). How narrow does the road become as a result? Proposal B Widen refuge islands – to what width? (not stated). What is the design of the crossings by the roundabout. Flat, as current? Raised, marked with paint of some kind – or not? Using parallel crossings would make the crossings more obvious Will the widened islands leave a road lane width of 3.2 – 4m width? (dangerous for cycle users on the road). No provision is made for active travel to/from Curbridge Road.

Box 3. Corn St. How wide will the on road advisory cycle lanes be? How wide is the road be along here? What effect might the “review of parking and road markings” result in?

Box 4. Proposal A. : (One-way traffic travelling from Market Square). A good idea as the road is narrower on this stretch. What plans (or not) are there for the road narrowings by No.25 and near the Market Square end?

Proposal B (On road advisory cycle lanes, removal of center line, 20mph speed limit with review of parking and road markings. (Cross Sections B & C))

The cross section drawings B and C (on drawing 2) have no scale. How wide will the advisory cycle lanes be? The margin to allow for car doors is good.

Proposal C (Review of existing build-outs for adjustment/removal). Without knowing the outcome, it is impossible to comment on how good the end result will be. Build outs to mark the ends of parking bays would be good, as they will also be used as informal crossing points as well as traffic speed restraint if no/few parked cars are present.

Proposal D (New zebra crossing adjacent to Marlborough Lane.). Good, does this signal the removal of the adjoining road narrowing by no.25 (referred to in proposal A above).

Proposal E (Close southern end of Holloway to traffic (pedestrian/cycle access only) with a review of parking and road markings. Access to/from Holloway via Welch Way only). Excellent, it creates a Low Traffic Neighbourhood while maintaining active travel permeability. As drivers will no longer be able to drive through Holloway Rd, might there end up being a lot of parents turning their vehicles around. If this ends up being the case, then Holloway Rd should become a School Street at the start and end of the school day.

Again complete uncertainty over the “review of parking and road markings” which could be good/bad for active travel.

Box 5. Market Square. (Proposal A: 20mph speed limit). A 20 limit is good. However, the junction is quite a large expanse of tarmac, the junction needs tightening up to slow traffic.

Box 6. Langdale Gate: (Proposal A: On road advisory cycle lanes, removal of center line, 20mph speed limit with review of road markings). What width cycle lanes are planned? The road width looks rather tight for this proposal, particularly at the Market Square end.

Box 8. (Existing off road cycle facility from Witan Way and Church Lane Proposal A: Minor measures to improve the existing path and review of route lighting)

This section is often congested (especially Sunday mornings), so it will need widening, including the bridge at some point (the bridge is a popular place to feed ducks from!)

Box10. (Oxford Hill Proposal A: Upgrade existing zebra crossing to a toucan with connecting shared-use paths) Upgrading to a toucan crossing is good. Why is it so offset from the desire line a bit to the west.

Box 11. (Existing off-road cycle facility from Oxford Hill to Courts Gardens Proposal A: Minor measures to improve the existing path and review of route lighting.) The first short section from Oxford Hill is very narrow. Google street view shows the hedge at the bottom encroaching on the tarmac, and then gradually leaning outwards as it gets higher. It needs a good cut to get it back to the edge of the tarmac (pref in early spring so it can grow back promptly). What are the “minor improvements?” How wide is this current facility, does it need upgrading to current guideline widths?

Box 12. (Existing off-road cycle facility from Courts Gardens to Park View Court Proposal A: Minor measures to improve the existing path and review of route lighting). What are the “minor improvements?” How wide is this current facility, does it need upgrading to current guideline widths? Level with Courts Gardens where the N- S shared path crosses the NW – SE aligned bridge over Madley Brook. This requires navigating a very sharp bend to get on the bridge (approaching from the south). Probably hard enough on a normal cycle, very difficult with a child/cargo trailer, tandem or other none standard cycle. This issue needs addressing to remove the navigational gymnastics required.

Box 13. (Unmade track from Park View Court to Woodbank Proposal A: Upgrade track to create a new off road shared-use facility and review of route lighting). How wide is the new shared use facility going to be? As it is essentially a new track surface, made it a segregated track.

Box 14. Woodbank to Footbridge Proposal A: New path creating an off road shared-use facility and review of route lighting. This should be a useful link adding permeability to the network. Same comment as above about width.

Proposal B: Review parapet/handrail requirements for footbridge. How wide is the bridge currently? Is it adequate?

Box 15. Woodbank Proposal A: 20mph speed limit Good, but why just Woodbank, the 20 limit could go further north. The current bollards need re spacing to allow more width for none standard cycles.

Box 16. Existing off road cycle facility from Woodbank to Wood Green School Entrance Proposal A: Minor measures to improve the existing path and review of route lighting, bollards and signing. Good, looks a good route. As part of the review, any barriers should be removed. There should be a 20 limit at the other end, as far as the A4095 Woodstock Road.

Options Overview Plan Sheet 3 of 4 : Box 6. Langdale Gate: Proposal A: On road advisory cycle lanes, removal of center line, 20mph speed limit with review of road markings. (Cross Section B) How wide is this street? Towards the Market Square end road width looks tight for this to work – google satellite view suggests 6.6m wide. What cycle lane/running lane widths are planned? It might work better at the Witam Way roundabout end as the road looks a bit wider.

Box 7. (Witan Way Roundabout: Proposal A: Create an off road shared-use facility on northwest corner between Langdale Gate and Witan Way. Proposal B: Widen refuge islands on Langdale Gate and Witan Way north). Current provision to get round the roundabout Witan roundabout is very poor. Having crossings provided should help - though how good depends on design details not supplied. What provision will there be to get across from the NW corner across Langdale Gate to the SW corner of Witam roundabout. The current island refuge is too small.

Box 8. (Existing off road cycle facility from Witan Way and Church Lane: Proposal A: Minor measures to improve the existing path and review of route lighting). What minor measures are envisaged?

Box 9. (Church Lane: Proposal A: 20 mph speed limit and carriageway patching where necessary).

Sounds OK.

To sum up, this scheme could be very good, or it might not be good. As always, the devil is in the detail.

[A. Objections & Concerns]

We are pleased to see the ideas that are being considered to improve the the roads around Witney for the good of all users. We have lived in Witney for 23 years and we have walked and cycled from our previous home on new Yatt road into town regularly. On getting older decided to move into Applegarth Court to future proof our lives.

We do not agree with the closure of the Holloway Road especially without due consideration to how anyone who needs to use the road will be able to turn around.

We propose you do not close the road at the end of Holloway Road and Corn street but further back. The preferred close points are, with Welch Way behind you, just after the college road entrance Or further along Holloway Road at the end of the bungalows before the turning to Applegarth Court. Then traffic could enter into Corn Street with cars only able to turn right. (No left turn Sign) Keeping buses and cycles two way. #1 Resident, Witney.

We are Applegarth Court residents and this proposal effects ourselves and all of our neighbours here and on the Holloway Road. We are very concerned that the emergency services and Police will be hampered hugely if the road is closed.

We are truly alarmed that such big changes have been given so little time for us to consider and consult with local residents and feel this time must be extended allowing for more discussion and therefore more thought out proposals. We are really dismayed in these days of open honest and transparency that we only received notification by letter on 26th January. Also we believe in extremely difficult times for businesses that your letter will not have reached the hands of those business in Corn Street as many have their doors locked and will now be sitting on their doormats.

We can’t have closure at corn street as we then will have constant turning into Applegarth Court we have to

pay to maintain this private road as residents but also more importantly we feel the risk to everyone while people shunt about in this narrow part of the road to turn around is completely unacceptable and very dangerous to the very cyclists and walkers your trying to help.

We are residents of Applegarth Court, and are writing to object to the closing of Holloway Road at the Corn Street end, and would also like to register the fact that we and the Holloway Road residents have not been given much time to absorb and discus the implications of your proposals. I also note that there is a traffic count being conducted in Holloway Road, which I assume is to do with your proposal, surely this is a waste as it will not truly reflect what would be the normal situation because we are all supposed to be staying at home. Giving us such short notice leads us to think that this is being rushed through whilst our minds are saturated with the Covid 19. Your proposed scheme we feel has not even thought of how it will affect the residents of both Applegarth Court and Holloway Road. This scheme should not proceed until the items outlined below have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Regardless of what becomes your final plan the “Double Yellow” lines at the entrance to Applegarth Court should be extended considerably because one cannot see clearly in either direction when sitting in the car, it also makes it difficult for HGV’s to access the site.

Please consider the points raised below. #3 Resident, Witney. As Applegarth Court residents we currently arrive and leave via Corn Street, this is because traversing Holloway Road is fraught with problems mainly because it is a single lane road due to the cars parked outside the houses on the road, this applies whichever way we approach our estate. In addition, approaching Holloway Road from the west on Welch Way necessitates crossing the oncoming traffic which we anticipate will increase due to your proposal, maybe a mini roundabout at this point would help. We would suggest that someone walks Holloway Road taking note that there is clear evidence that vehicles have mounted the pavement purely to pass another vehicle or turn round. This will only get worse if the proposal proceeds.

As we understand your proposal, Corn Street entrance is to be closed completely to traffic, please explain how delivery drivers or any vehicle and particularly HGV’s are to turn round once they have passed the road to the College. We are pretty confident that Applegarth Court residents will require a barrier to the entrance of our estate to stop it being used for turning round, as the road surfaces on our estate are not meant to withstand heavy traffic, we are a private road and responsible for its maintenance.

The making of the Town end of Corn Street westward bound traffic only has already shown to us what is likely to happen when entrance to Holloway Road is closed completely to traffic, currently any traffic wishing to go in the eastward direction to Witney is being forced to turn round in the road, this is because the road at the Buttercross end has been closed due to a large hole for maintenance work, and nobody can traverse this part of Corn Street.

If you examine your proposals objectively we think you will come to the conclusion that there is no need to close Corn Street end of Holloway Road for the following reason immediately below,

Once road users have found out that coming into Witney from the west they cannot continue beyond Holloway Road, and have to go down Holloway Road, they will automatically take to Welch Way on subsequent visits to Witney as it will be quicker, and this will increase the traffic using Welch Way. It may be useful to have “Notices for Residents Only” at both ends of the road from Corn Street to the Holloway Road junction with the turning to the College.

It may be necessary to install a small “Road block Island” opposite the Crofts entrance and make all traffic leaving the Crofts turn left, as these are the only ones that would use Holloway Road as a rat run.

My Daily paper reports that about one in ten of the flurry of new cycle and walk projects so far created have been reversed and abandoned. The grant has been wasted.

The present proposal for Holloway Road would certainly fail and would need to be reversed.

A barrier at the Corn Street end of Holloway Road will create a " no man's land" where it will be impossible for cars, delivery vans and taxis to even turn around. #4 Resident, Witney.

With that jamb in place the residents in Applegarth Court, where I live, will find it impossible to enter or leave our homes by car. Cars may be undesirable but I am running my second, all electric car and am sure others will follow.

Whilst out and about, walking my dog, I see vanishingly few cycles and those I do see are riding on the pavement not the road. At night they have no lights.

The scheme will force delivery vans and others to create even more pollution as they drive up and down and around obstructions and one way systems. Again no gain but real damage.

Within the last two weeks I have had occasion to await an ambulance here which arrived very promptly. After your scheme is in place I would be afraid that it will be delayed by the proposed diversions.

So much for a few of the negatives.

But if you must include Holloway Road in this scheme then can I suggest that you solve the "rat run problem" (which to my mind doesn't actually exist, although speeding does) by a different means.

Place a gate barrier adjacent to the Holloway Road turning that leads to the college car park. Emergency services could open the gate as could the dustbin lorries.

Holloway Road would no longer be a through road, which seems to be your objective. There would be no dead end.

The barrier would be simple and straightforward to install (and to remove in due course).

Re your proposed plans for the Holloway Road / Corn Street junction.

In August 2019 I contacted OCC Highways requesting to repaint and widen the double yellow lines across the entrance to Applegarth Court (ENQ1984511). Vehicles frequently park overhanging the current lines making entrance/exit to Applegarth Court difficult and often impossible for some larger vehicles for example #5 Resident, Witney. Emergency Services/Refuse collection. Should the parked vehicle be a van, looking out for approaching traffic is limited and makes the exit dangerous. To date there are some white painted lines on the pavement proposing to make the lines narrower, not wider. May I therefore please ask that during your visit/discussion later this week you give the matter of widening the lines some urgent consideration. Thank you.

Regarding the new proposed road layout please consider the following two options:

1. Close Holloway Road between Number 2 (first bungalow next to the Applegarth Court entrance) and the Electricity Compound opposite with a barrier of your choice (the land in front of the electric compound could be used as a turning point - at the moment it is used as an illegal car park). Paint double yellow lines on both sides of Holloway Road from the new barrier to Corn Street thus protecting the access to Applegarth Court. This section of road currently has some double yellow lines. Unfortunately, especially at weekends and evenings these are parked on by visitors to the many public houses and restaurants in Corn Street. By positioning the barrier here all traffic to Applegarth Court will arrive from Corn Street. It will also prevent vehicles from the Holloway Road/Welch Way section under your present proposal using the Applegarth Court entrance to turn around in. Applegarth Court is a private road and the entrance from Holloway Road is not of suitable construction for HGVs and multiple other vehicles to use as a turn around. There will be damage. Will OCC/WODC bear the cost of repair and maintenance? Somehow you have to provide a turning area other than Applegarth Court should your present proposals go ahead.

2. Make Holloway Road "One Way" from Corn Street to the first right turn into the College entrance/car park and leave it "Two Way" between the College entrance road and Welch Way. This would provide a turning point at the College Road junction. Should this be the decision please widen the double yellow lines across the entrance to Applegarth Court. The lines in their present position do not offer adequate safety protection to the exit/entrance.

I do hope this information from a resident with local knowledge of traffic movements in the area is of some value and will help in making your decision.

I welcome the remainder of your plans for Witney, especially the introduction of a 20mph speed limits and the new bicycle routes

Following on from your letter dated 21st January we would like to express our concerns regarding the proposed changes to Holloway Road. #6 Resident, Witney. We do not want this scheme to go ahead until the following issues has been rectified.

1. Vehicles parked along Holloway Road, this does make it difficult to drive to Welch way from Applegarth

court.

2. If access is only permitted from Welsh way this will cause problems with vehicles who need to turn around once past the college turning to exit into welch way. This means vehicles will have to turn into Applegarth court which is a private road paid for and maintained by all of the residents. WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN!

3. LARGE lorries will have NO where to turn once passed the collage turning. This would cause problems for Applegarth court residences travelling to work etc.

4. We think you should leave Holloway Road as it is but to maybe add speed bumps to slow traffic down and signs saying for excess/residents only.

Please could you take all the above into consideration when going forward as this is a Major concern to us.

As a resident of Applegarth Court (off Holloway Road) I wanted to respond to the County Council’s proposal to introduce active travel measures in Witney.

I have completed the on-line questionnaire on the consultation site, but as this proposal does raise a number of concerns I wanted to write to your directly in the hope that consideration will be given to the following points.

1) Holloway Road – closure of the road at the Corn Street entrance #7 Resident, Witney.

i) In my experience Holloway Road can be quite narrow, due to cars being parked on the left hand side, making it in effect almost a one way road, so driving up and down can often prove difficult by means of always having to pull in and out of residents’ parked cars. As Applegarth Court is at the very top of Holloway Road the preferred safer entrance/exit is via Corn Street. Also noting that if Holloway Road is to be access only and cars will be parking up the hill towards Corn Street, how and where will they turn (noting large delivery vehicles and dustbin vehicles etc)? Residents of Applegarth have a strong suspicion that Applegarth Court may become a turning circle despite being a private road (this is particularly of concern with

regard to cars that will park directly outside the Three Horseshoes pub. Do the council envisage putting double yellow lines from Applegarth Court alongside the Horseshoes to the barrier (or other entry/exit deterrence at the Corn Street end)? Please advise the plan for ensuring that sufficient provision has been made for vehicle turning and parking in a street that cannot actually accommodate this. Can I also ask where you envisage mothers dropping off their Children at the Batt School to park, residents are also concerned that Holloway Road will also become an early morning and evening car park for the Batt school run.

On discussing the traffic proposal this with local Corn Street business owners, it has become obvious, due to covid and infrequent visits to their shops and pubs, many seem unaware of this scheme and are quite worried by it. Why is this consultation period only three weeks and not the usual 6-12 weeks? Surely they must be allowed a realistic consultation period to allow all those affected to respond fully?

I also note that in the consultation documents it clearly states that ‘there will be no impact or change to emergency vehicles’. Witney’s police and fire stations are located at the end of Holloway Road, and often use Holloway Road to short-cut their emergency journeys across the top end of town (via Corn Street). How do the suggested measures accommodate this please?

Alternative options to the Holloway Road top end road closure include:

• Leave as is but include clear signage to say ‘Access only to residents’ • Barrier with key for residents • Road ramps to prevent rat run scenario • Strict one way and no parking tow away signs ii) Traffic flow via Welch Way – as I deliver and collect children from Applegarth Court to Cogges School (opposite end of Witney), where cycling/walking is not an option due to distance and age of children) I regularly drive via Welsh Way, this is a very busy road (outside of covid) and a two mile drive can often take up to 50 minutes, please advise how adding further vehicles to this route is going to help at all? Also residents from all sides of Corn Street would have to join the city centre ques, when coming off the A40 past McDonald’s et all, which is already a very 95

busy route. It stands to reason that central Witney will be gridlocked making it more difficult and dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists!

iii) I note your cycling path provision includes Madley Park, but it seems to exclude the Windrush Place Development on Curbridge Road (the estate is nothing short of a small town and is almost wholly made up of young families and children) and there is no cycle route included in the plan for them/Deer Park to the city centre, noting too that the road running alongside B&Q and through to the elderly Richmond Retirement home there isn’t even a footpath!!! Why aren’t you including this route which is surely a vital cycling route?

iv) I also wish to point out that walking around Witney, footpaths are often halved in favour of making them half cyclist and half walking. If you ever walk these routes surely you have realised that this doesn’t work and causes frustration between both groups. Please allow adequate space for both groups!

v) Missing and opportunity – if the consultation deems that changes to Corn Street are worthy, why are you allowing buses to still use that route? Could consideration be given to upgrading the top end of Corn Street (from Scott Fraser down to Horseshoes pub) cobbling or paving that area with Victorian lighting and creating a desirable café culture with access for walkers and cyclists but no vehicles. This would follow on nicely from Church Green adding to the town centre’s tourist value and making a nice area for children to move freely and safely and a pleasant eating area on this lovely Victorian Street. Bus stops at the top end of town could be moved to more strategic positions promoting a reasonable walking culture.

Finally could I please request that these submissions are seriously considered as our concerns for Applegarth Court, Holloway Road and Witney generally have been carefully considered and the implications will have an impact on all those who live and work in Witney for many years to come.

We live at Applegarth Court and have received the travel measures proposal in Witney #8 Resident, Witney. We feel strongly against our access from and to Corn Street being withdrawn and are writing to object to this Perhaps a Toucan crossing at the Corn St and Holloway Road junction would be a solution with a “no through road” sign in place.

We are writing to you as residents of Applegarth Court objecting to

• the impact of traffic, road access, highway safety, parking

Reference case number WITAT2

We are all for less traffic and for more walk ways, but your scheme has not considered the impact on ALL the existing residents. We do not want this scheme to go ahead until the following issues have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. We are concerned of the disruptive impact on the residents of Holloway Road and Applegarth Court. There must be a better solution?

1) Holloway Road is effectively a single lane road due to the cars parked outside the houses on the road. This currently makes driving up from Welch Way a difficult and precarious exercise. As a result Applegarth Court residents currently tend to leave via the Corn Street junction. #9 Resident, Witney. 2) Your proposal is to allow access from Welch Way only. This means every vehicle entering Holloway Road will be Parked Facing up and Pointing to the Corn Street end. This also means they will all have to turn around to leave or park in Holloway Road.

3) The Question is where will they Turn around? a) On peoples drives. Not an option. b) In the College or on the college Road? How does the College feel about this? It presents a danger to students and visitors alike. c) What about the Vehicles parked in between College Road and Corn Street - Where do they turn? Do they drive up to Applegarth Court and Turn in Applegarth Court or in the entrance to Applegarth Court.? This is a private road for resident’s only. d) It will be difficult for any car or Large Vehicle coming into Holloway Road and wishing to turn around to leave. e) In fact it will be impossible for any vehicle between the College Entrance Road and Applegarth Court to turn unless they turn in the entrance of, or within Applegarth Court, The Residents of

Applegarth Court (Private Road) will NOT ALLOW this to Happen.

4) We require the Council to Define how you will provide a turning Area or Circle for vehicles without them entering or turning in Applegarth Court.Think of large delivery trucks - Dustbin Lorries (when they are not collecting from Applegarth Court ) - Fire Appliances- Skip Lorries - Builders Trucks, delivery vans. etc. Imagine the nightmare when you have two or three all trying to turn around, and any residents also wishing to leave.

5) To make this work you need to create a turning area and give Applegarth residents vision of traffic coming up Holloway Road. The turning area could be between Corn Street, Applegarth Court, and part of Holloway Road. It will need to be a yellow lined for Turning and Vision only, with enforced No Parking. BUT I believe this area is too narrow to achieve this - Only you can confirm by turning a large Lorry around in this area.

6) To date you appear not to have considered this scenario. In your scheme residents leaving Applegarth Court will need site of vision of any vehicle coming up Holloway Road. This would involve restricting current parking near our entrance, in Holloway Road.

7) The addition of many Cyclists believing they have priority over the residents trying to negotiate Holloway Road, will cause frustration - confrontation and undoubtedly accidents.

8) *** Applegarth court is a private road (mainly in block paving)*** The residents are responsible for its maintenance and each pays a contribution towards this. *** Any damage to our entrance and road will be expensive - and we should not have to bear the cost of any such repairs. *** To ensure vehicles do not turn and damage the paving blocks - we propose the council provides us with a solution to our privacy.

9) Traffic flow will increase on Welch Way as your scheme will force all residents in, and off Corn Street to leave via the 5 Ways Round About. This will result in a large increase in traffic on Welch Way - and further congestion of traffic turning into Holloway Road across Welch Way.

10) We do not want you to go ahead with this scheme - If you do we need reassurance's you will resolve the

above concerns. We need you to revisit your plans, and come up with a plan that does not negatively impact the lives of the residents of Holloway Road and Applegarth Court.

11) Other Solutions -(You have not allowed enough time for this to be thoroughly investigated).a) Why not Leave it as it is and have" No Left Turn" signs (except for Residents Only) into Holloway Road with a number of new speed bumps and no parking signs, and / or make the whole of Corn Street access for Residents only. Or B) Make Holloway Road a one way street up from Welch Way to Corn Street , with a special turn (or lights) for the Police onto Welch Way, and create an entrance off Ashcombe Close on to Welch Way.Orc) Make Holloway Road a one Way from Corn street to Welch Way (The Rat Run?) "The Turn In states" "Residents Only" with strategically placed road humps. You must avoid making this one large (narrow) cul-de-sac where vehicles will find it impossible to turn around to leave and ruin the residents quality of Life.

Subject: Objection to the proposed Closure of Holloway Road at the junction with Corn Street (Reference WITAT2)

I am writing to you as a resident of Applegarth Court, to strongly object to the proposed closure of Holloway Road at the junction with Corn Street. I have suggested an alternative which I hope you find constructive.

I have not had time to comment on the overall scheme, due to the short time scale. #10 Resident, Witney. Introduction We are all for improving access to walking and cycle ways, and to eventually move over to less polluting electric vehicles, and to that end we support the principles behind the scheme. I believe, walkers, cyclists and motor vehicles, should all live in harmony.

Your plan should not be to demonise the car owning community, nor the service delivery organisations that serve them.

We believe you are steam rolling this scheme through with little concern, for the impact it will have on the

residents of Holloway Road and Applegarth Court. An example of this, is the short time frame you have allocated. A number of business owners do not live locally, and not aware of the scheme. The first time they will see your residents’ letter is after the covid-19 shutdown.

We do not want this scheme to go ahead until the following issues have been resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.

Summary of the Issues Holloway Road closed to traffic at junction with Corn Street. We strongly object to the proposed closure.

The Bus and Cycle lane is not a reason to close Holloway Road. It will not take long for car and delivery drivers to avoid coming up Corn Street. As long as it is clear, that Corn street is for access only, and closed to through traffic.

The closure will create one large and narrow cul-de-sac. Large and small vehicles alike parked or delivering to Holloway Road, will find it impossible (in parts) to turn around to leave via Welch Way.

The only way to turn vehicles wishing to leave will be to create turning areas. The residents will not allow Applegarth Court to become the turning area.

The impact on Applegarth resident’s lives due to the change of Access.

The Detailed Reasons for Objecting 1) Holloway Road. a) Holloway Road is effectively a single lane road due to the parked cars. b) Cars entering Holloway Road from Welch Way will all be parked facing up and pointing towards the Corn Street junction. c) In order to leave via Welch Way, they will need to turn around. d) Add to this mix, a collection of service and delivery vehicles. Delivery vans, Dustbin Lorries (when they are not collecting from Applegarth Court) Fire Appliances- Skip

100

Lorries - Builders Trucks, etc.

Imagine the nightmare when you have two or three all trying to turn around to leave, and residents wishing to leave.

2) Where do they Turn around? This depends on what part of Holloway road they are parked? a) On Resident’s private drives? b) In the College grounds or on the college Road? This would present a danger to students and visitors alike. Has this been discussed with the Board of Governors? c) Vehicles parked in between College Road and Corn Street. Do they drive into Applegarth Court or turn around in the entrance? d) A Turning area? A possible option is between the Corn Street proposed barrier and Applegarth Court. I do not believe it is wide enough to turn a large vehicle, without damaging the Three Horseshoe’s garden fence or No 1 Holloway Roads Garage? e) Add to this equation, the addition of many cyclists believing they have priority over the residents of Holloway Road, will cause frustration, confrontation and undoubtedly accidents.

*Please confirm if the scheme gives cyclists priority? Will they be allowed to travel over the speed limit? Will you enforce the 20 MPH limits? What part of Holloway Road do you expect them to cycle on?

3) The Answer is Nobody Knows?

Applegarth Court. 3a) It will be impossible for any large vehicle between the College and Applegarth Court to turn unless they enter Applegarth Court, or use the entrance.

101

“The Residents of Applegarth Court will NOT ALLOW this to Happen”

We require the Council to define how they intend to solve this issue. And prove its feasibility by turning at least 2 to 3 large Lorries around in the area.

I believe the area, between Corn Street and Applegarth Court is too narrow.?

3b) On leaving Applegarth Court residents will require a clear vision of vehicles and cyclists coming up Holloway road, to prevent any accidents. This will involve extending the yellow lines in Holloway road, and possibly removing a parking bay? and the need for parking enforcement of the yellow lines.

4) Applegarth Residents Not Consulted before Scheme Announced. All Applegarth residents purchased their homes within the last 18 months? A number would not have bought properties if your plans were known at the time.

5) The Transportation Statement for Applegarth Court The NPPF requires there is safe and suitable access to the development, I believe Applegarth Court would not have been approved for development if your proposed scheme had been in place? Nobody would have approved a scheme that made access so difficult.

6) Impact on Residents Quality of Life. *** We believe your scheme will impact the quality of life of the residents, we know it will impact on ours, and it will substantially lower the value of our houses. *** We would expect the WODC to reduce the rateable values on all properties in Applegarth Court. *** The residents of Applegarth are responsible for the maintenance of the road and each pays a contribution towards this. *** Any damage to our entrance and block paving road will be expensive. We will expect the WODC to bear the cost of any such repairs. *** To stop vehicles using Applegarth Courts entrance to turn, we will be looking to the WODC to provides us with a controlled gating system to prevent any damage to the entrance.

102

7) Other Issues and General Suggestions a) We expect the scheme will increase the traffic flow on Welch Way as all residents in, and off Corn Street will exit Corn street via the 5 Ways Roundabout. This will result in further congestion of traffic turning into Holloway Road across Welch Way. b) I believe closing Holloway with a barrier will have a negative impact on the Police response times to emergency calls, in Corn Street, and the areas beyond. c) Ask the College to request all staff leave Holloway Road via Welch Way. d) All roads off Corn Street to display signs, aimed at residents, visitors and delivery drivers, when leaving, that Corn Street is closed to through traffic. This will ensure the majority when leaving will head for the 5 ways roundabout, and not for the restricted use Bus Lane.

8) Alternative solution. After looking at other possible solutions, (one-way systems, the barrier etc.) My solution would be to leave Holloway road as it is. (It Works).

No Barrier, “Leave it Two Way”, with possible Residents Parking only. a) Leave Holloway as it is * I believe the rat run situation will work itself out over a short period of time. * Leave it as is – review after say 6 months of the Bus Lane opening. * “Give Way to Walkers? - Cyclists and Busses”? signs leaving from Corn Street. * Walkers will cross many access and road openings walking up Corn Street. Holloway Road will only be one of them (This should not be a problem) * If review is OK with all involved, leave things as they are.

The bus and cycle lane is not a reason to close Holloway Road. It will not take long for car and delivery drivers to avoid coming up Corn Street.

103

As long as it signed “Access Only”, and “Closed to Through Traffic”

b) Creative use of Sensible Signs. The KEY sign- is Corn Street is closed to through traffic due to the BUS Lane. (You could designate Corn Street for residents only now).

With signs at the turn into Holloway Road from Corn Street, that Holloway was: - For example, “No Entry” - “Access only” - “Residents only”.

This would NOT immediately stop non-residents, and others from entering.

But why would they persist after the first few runs, once they realised, they would only be entering Welch Way (and maybe queueing to leave)

They would soon work out they will be better off turning onto Welch Way or onto Ducklington Lane from the 5 Ways, rather than cutting through Holloway Road. They would soon realise that Corn Street is closed to through traffic, and find an alternative route, and I doubt they would choose to go via Holloway Road. c) Leaving Holloway Road to turn Right onto Corn Street. Again, Creative use of Signs and possibly Lights? For example, “No Left Turn” - “Not Enter Bus Lane” “Give Way to Buses – Cyclists - Walkers” signs, when turning onto Corn Street.

I have conducted my own survey of your proposed plan to make changes to Corn Street & Holloway Road in Witney. And have given my reason's below of why l think Holloway Rd should be left as is now, and Not close it off at Corn Street.

If your new plans were to go ahead, the below information is how l see it turning out. With the chaos of all the extra cars on Welch Way.

Second Response:

104

Starting with HOLLOWAY ROAD - The residents of Applegarth Court, which is a Private Road, off of Holloway Rd are not at all happy with the Closure of Corn Street at the junction into Holloway Road. We all feel that it's going to be Chaos at Our end of the Holloway Rd, with Lorry's, Car's, Dustbin Trucks, Delivery Van's etc. all needing to turn around to get back down to Welch Way. What if there were 3 lorries backed up all trying to turn around, and residence of Applegarth also trying to get out of their homes onto Holloway Rd. The residence of Applegarth may have too consider putting up gate's to stop traffic turning into our private road, Not something we relish because of the expense.

There are 12 Disabled Bungalows on Holloway Rd with 2 disabled parking bays plus the other 16 parking bays on the street, plus some of these residence's probably have Carer's come by daily in their car's & park up. If your scheme goes ahead, both sides of the street will need to be kept clear with Double Yellow Lines for the extra traffic to get up & down Holloway to create some sort of ease & order. Holloway Road consists of - Applegarth Court 17 cars, Ashcombe Close with cars on driveways & 20 cars parked on the street. The Welch Way Service Road again with cars on driveways & 15 cars parked on the street. plus the 2 side roads going up to the College, all full of parked cars on the street, plus all the homes with car's on their driveways. Plus the 85 Car spots for the Staff only in the College, apparently all students have to use other car parks or the surrounding streets to park up for the day. I'm painting a picture here of all the extra cars that would have to go up and down Holloway to Welch Way, where as now half would go into Corn Street.

WELCH WAY - Were do l begin. You will need to install traffic lights to keep the traffic flowing to even have a chance to get into Holloway Road, with all the extra traffic that you will be creating, by closing the bottom of Corn Street into Market Square, & closing off Holloway Road, and pushing us all onto Welch Way. I have spoken to the Fire Dept on Welch Way, and they Quoted to me "Life before Covid 19, at certain times of the day, the traffic comes to a grinding holt outside the Fire Station as it creeps round to the left into the High Street. And yes most day's the road is busy" The Witney Police Station also in Welch Way, have their police cars parked in their car park on Holloway Rd, just up from Welch Way, they are also concerned with the extra traffic. And l haven't spoken to the Witney Hospital yet or the Medical Centre both opposite the police station in Welch Way, to ask how they feel about all the extra traffic.

CORN STREET -

105

By closing off Corn St at the bottom, all the Residence that live on and off of Corn St, The Crofts, The Weavers, The Springs, Highworth Pl, Saxon Way, Orchard Way, Swinburn pl, Corndell Gdns, Queen Emmas Dyke, Lowell Pl. The Car Works Garage, small business's, the Brewery, the shops, the Pubs, the Restaurants etc. Will all have to drive up to the 5 Ways Roundabout to get out, & then possibly driving into Welch Way. The number of dwellings that this affects is massive.

I've walked down all the above streets, & the number of homes & dwellings & business's is staggering. But in all of this extra created Chaos, where do the Cyclists fit in? And how many cyclists are we talking about, because l don't see that many in Corn St or Holloway Rd.

The final word - we don't believe that the Holloway Road will become a 'Rat Run', we think it will work it's way through, once you make the change's to Corn Street. So we Vote to leave Holloway Road as it is now, with No Road Closure. And leave you to deal with all the extra traffic coming out of Corn Street into Welch Way.

Re: Introduction of Active Travel Measures in Witney

Whilst we are broadly in favour of improving access to Witney town centre for cyclists and pedestrians we have a number of concerns regarding the detail of the proposal.

Closure of Holloway Road. • No evidence has been presented to back up the assertion that Holloway Road will become a rat run. #11 Resident, Witney If traffic is discouraged from entering Corn St from the 5 Ways roundabout for all but access to local businesses and residents (due to the closure of Corn St above Holloway road to private vehicular traffic), the incentive for using Holloway road as a rat run is unclear. • No detail of provision for a turning area has been shown for traffic servicing Holloway Road. This turning provision must be suitable for the safe turning of delivery vehicles, removal vans etc. We do not see how this could be achieved at the closure point of Holloway Road.

Corn St from Five Ways Roundabout to Holloway Road

106

• No detail of provision for a turning area has been shown for traffic accessing Corn St from the 5 Ways roundabout. These turning provisions would need to be suitable to permit the safe turning of delivery vehicles such are beer lorries for the local pubs. • A redesign of the exit from the 5 Ways roundabout to Corn St to emphasis the local nature of the road and the extension of the 20 mile per hour zone to include Holloway Road (backed by traffic calming measures and suitable signage) would discourage use as a short cut whilst still allowing delivery traffic access and egress without the need for dedicated turning spaces.

Corn St from Holloway Road to Market Square • In common with the rest of Corn St, this section has a vibrant mix of residential and retail accommodation. Many of the businesses, for instance takeaways, require short term parking to allow customers to pick up and to allow for deliveries. Changes to customer convenience may cause a reduction in custom and may adversely affect the long term viability of these local businesses and therefor the vibrancy of the street. Traffic travelling westbound will regularly need to enter the eastbound bus and cycle lane to pass delivery vehicles and parked cars. A significant increase in cycle traffic may make this impractical and possibly unsafe. This may require that deliveries and pickups be suspended during peak times.

Second response: Since the proposals were publicised I have been asking delivery drivers which end of Holloway Road they are entering and leaving when they come to Applegarth Court. All use the Corn Street end.

I've just had a chat with a UPS driver and he says that the paper shop on the north side of the lower end of Corn Street is a pick up/drop off point for his company and for DPD. He regularly picks up or drops off 100 parcels at a time there and has a lot of difficulty doing so under the current traffic conditions, having to use Marlborough Lane as a turning area.

I will be emailing you with some further comments with a map and photographs.

Third response: The teams meeting was useful in that Applegarth Court residents could primarily express concern over the 107

proposed blocking off of Holloway Road and its impact on access/turning of vehicles. Last year we discussed having a gate at our entrance, as vehicles do sometimes come in and turn on our private road now. However, the overwhelming majority were against the idea as becoming a 'gated development' does not help to make us part of a local inclusive community.

In regard to access it may be useful to look at the Transport Statement that was submitted to West Oxfordshire District Council in 2017 when the developer applied to demolish the existing bungalow and build our houses. It includes mathematically modelled data on potential vehicle traffic.

Please see attached photos showing everyday parking violations within the area where vehicles would be expected to turn.

Of the 25 individuals living in Applegarth Court 16 of us are 60 years old or over. We've all moved here, from Witney, or much further afield, within the past 18 months. Many of us are still working (from home at the moment) but everyone has said they bought in this development because of easy pedestrian access to the facilities in Witney, and from the desire to keep physically active as we get older. We all have electric vehicle charging points. My husband [name redacted] and I did a lot of research before moving to Witney. One of the main attractions was a vibrant economy within the town.

There is clearly a tight time frame in which to spend the money you have been granted for this project. However I do feel that any changes to road layout/access should be considered within the plan for traffic movement within the town in its entirety. This is particularly vital at this time when we will need to 'kickstart' the economy and support local businesses that have taken a massive 'hit' during the period of Covid restrictions.

I am very concerned that some of your proposals will negatively affect the resilience of traffic flow within the 108

town. The chances of grid-locks occurring are more likely, and grid-locks generate more pollution than free flowing traffic. I wonder whether the Five Ways Roundabout, and Welch Way, would be robust enough to cope with traffic flow in instances of any blockages such as an accident, or just sheer volume of traffic?

Please look at the attached map:

If Holloway Road is blocked at the Corn St end all vehicles entering or exiting the area in red have to pass through the Five Ways Roundabout. If for any reason this becomes blocked vehicles within the red area would be effectively trapped. If Holloway Road is blocked at the Corn St end all vehicles within the yellow area must enter and exit via Welch Way. At present there is no room for a turning lane into Holloway Road from either direction on Welch Way. If Welch Way becomes blocked for any reason vehicles within the yellow area would be trapped.

If Holloway Road is made 'one-way' (north to south) then traffic from the yellow area AND the red area would all be feeding into the Five Ways Roundabout. In the event of a blockage there could be a total grid- lock as the roundabout would have static traffic on it with vehicles unable to move to effectively ease traffic flow. 109

In BOTH of the above scenarios the Five Ways Roundabout would also be coping with traffic from the businesses at the centre of town end of Corn St.

Sadly I am very familiar with traffic flow issues where vehicles are unable to move due to blockages in more than one direction. I lived in inner London for 18 years; commuted into central Cambridge for 6 years; and into Bath for 5 years. All traffic nightmares. Points to be discussed/added to consultation:

I'm a bit perplexed as to how we find ourselves in this situation, why has there not been a more regular and "little and often" approach to this kind of infrastructure improvements over many years?

The plans for Witney have a lot of concentration around areas that already have infrastructure in place - i.e Langel common. If these need improvements then that is due to a lack of maintaining current infrastructure. Should grants be used for this use?

I'm not sure how much money the council spends on surveys or reports to be carried out but I really don't see the need for this as a quick look around Witney and it's clear to see where is missing cycling improvements and how these can easily be implemented.

#12 Unknown Below is a list of streets in Witney and one in Carterton, where, it would be very straight forward to add cycle tracks (off-road and segregated) to improve safety and efficiency of other modes of transport.

Curbridge Road Welch Way Ducklington Lane (west side) Buford Road Oxford Hill and Newland Thorney Leys Road Witan Way Corn Street Alvescot Road (Carterton)

110

All these streets already have either a pavement that can be widened or excess verge space that could be utilised for shared paths. This isn't rocket science so it really does baffle me why we don't provide adequate infrastructure for safe cycling.

Welch Way for me is an obvious choice for shared use path as there is sufficient space without using the road and this is a key route for town and amenities. Hospital, Doctors, Fire and Police stations, shops and supermarkets. They are all key locations for easy access and providing no cycle infrastructure here is criminal.

Lastly I'd just like to make two points:

Build it and they will come.

And, we tell kids not to play in traffic, but we force them to cycle in it!!

Something to think about.

Active Travel Measures in Witney

While I applaud any measure to encourage cycling, I must object to this present plan for Corn Street Witney. As I am a resident of Swan Court, I see a huge increase in mileage for drivers living here. I myself am too old to cycle I’m afraid but, in non covid times, I regularly get lifts to St. Mary’s Church and Sainsburys. This proposal is going to cause my lifts a great dead of trouble, whichever direction they come from, a journey of #13 Resident, Witney a few minutes turning into a drive half way around Witney. The same difficultly will face Marlborough Lane and a good part of Corn Street.

Is the huge expense of these operations going to be worth while, causing a lot extra driving around town for not very much benefit.

I do agree, however, that a lower speed limit is very good. Hopefully it will slow down some of the mad

111

drivers that inhabit Witney.

I am a resident of Marlborough Lane, living at no [redacted] Marlborough Lane. I am very concerned about the proposed change in access to Marlborough Lane and I will explain further below, including photos as evidence:

• Access to Marlborough Lane is already restricted by the limitation of the width of the Lane. However the Lane is wider, with better & safer access, from the Corn Street side of the Lane.

• The Corn Street entrance to the Lane allows a visibility point & passing point outside of the entrance of the school. This means when leaving the Lane you can check there are no other vehicles coming up & down that part of the Lane, thus allowing for safe access.

• The Corn Street access point allows safer exiting from the lane since you need to use the glass windows of the shops opposing in Corn Street as mirrors to see if any pedestrians are about to cross the line – otherwise it is a completely blind pull out. There is no such safe option leaving the lane via #14 Resident, Witney the Blue Boar to the Market Square – it is a blind pull out straight into the pedestrians & dangerous.

• There is a long narrow stretch from my property to the Market Square end with no suitable passing places. This will result in increased reversing & manoeuvring of vehicles with pedestrians & children on the Lane. I am also concerns about damage to my building.

• The Market Square access to the Lane is extremely narrow & height restricted - see photo. It will not be accessible for many larger vehicles.

• The market Square access crosses a larger expanse of pavement in the High Street with a higher number of pedestrians than on Corn Street. At night there are more drunk people around the Market Square area of Witney, which seems a health & safety risk to the drivers & these people.

• The Market Square access means driving directly past & through the Blue Boars Courtyard garden – their outside seating area. This is a health & safety concern in the evening when there are drunk 112

people in the Lane in this very area. On a personal note, I care for my parents so have to drive back to my house at 10pm at night after visiting them. I will be scared to do this having to pass & drive through the drunk people at this time of night. There are also hotel rooms the other side of the Lane so the visitors to the Blue Boar will be going to & from the hotel at night. It concerns me having to drive through this area late at night. If nothing else residents should be allowed to use the Corn Street entrance after 7 pm for safety reasons.

• The Blue Board often have there large bins out in the Lane, making access difficult at night, see photo.

• Even now using the Corn Street access, when having deliveries of household items I have to make special arrangements for alternative smaller delivery vehicles to be used, otherwise they have to park in Corn Street (blocking one side of the road) to carry the goods up the Lane to my property. Access for larger vehicles is just not possible from the Market Square entrance – evidenced by photo.

• There is a lot of traffic to & from the school & by changing the access arrangements you will be sending this traffic through much more of the Lane, thus increasing congestion, having vehicles trying to pass or reverse, especially at school opening & closing times. As a resident is very concerning.

These access changes will, in my opinion as a resident of Marlborough Lane, be a significant detriment; putting mine & other people’s safety at risk for the reasons mentioned above. A lot of small children & parents walk from the Market Square end to the school & back so having increased traffic flow in that area, which is narrower with no passing places, will make the Lane more dangerous for everyone. I therefore strongly object to these proposals; as a resident we should be able to have safe & convenient access to our properties. I hope you do consider my comments & change your plans for Marlborough Lane. I have more photos as evidence if you would like to see them. It would be useful to know if the people coming up with these proposals have actually visited the lane themselves so they understand the access limitations already & understand the full detrimental impact of these suggestions?

I would like a response to my comments.

113

Second Response: Thank you for confirming receipt of my comments. I noticed today this sign which is looking down Marlborough Lane out towards to the Market Square. And also how the Blue Boar use this area for storage & all their bins, often partially blocking that part of the Lane. Both photos are looking out towards the market Square.

I also showed the consultation to family and there had problems understanding what some of the wider proposals meant. We ought think it would have been useful if you had included a map to show the proposals.

114

I live in Weavers Close off The Crofts. There wasn’t a rat-run issue in Holloway Road until the High Street was closed during Covid. Should the scheme go ahead access to Weavers Close will only be possible from the western part of corn street. This is making life very difficult as I will have to drive all the way around Witney to access the places I go to in the town centre or east of Witney, instead of a direct route there.

Will High Street remain closed under these proposals? It doesn’t say.

Recently whilst walking on Corn Street I had to step into the road due to adult cyclists on the pavement, #15 Resident, Witney which is very unfair.

The catchment areas of the schools – The Batt school and St. Mary’s are quite wide as they are faith schools and some people will drive as coming long distances.

Access to the college will also be affected.

The Five Ways roundabout is very difficult with most of the traffic coming from Welch Way to Ducklington

115

Lane and will need traffic lights.

I would like to complain and share my concerns over some of the proposals for Upper Corn Street One Way & Bus Lane (Holloway Rd – Market Sq) project.

HEALTH & SAFETY Shop’s, Pubs and Restaurant business in Upper Corn Street that take in large deliveries will have drivers and staff having to cross the potentially busier road with pump trucks/pallets. They will be unable to off-load on the side of the road there business is located as you can’t unload in a bus lane or drive the wrong way down a one way street! If Upper Corn Street was just offices and hairdressers there would not be an Health and Safety issue.

INCREASED TRAFFIC Traffic volume will increase due to drivers trying to access parking spaces either side of the road by Fat Lil’s (by Holloway Road) rather than just parking and turning around. Workers, Customers and Residents needing access to private off road parking between 10&12 Corn St. also #16 Business, Witney Marlborough Lane & Swan Ct. will need to drive into town to access these hence making town busier.

BUS’S & CYCLES EXEMPT If Bus’s and Cycles are to be exempt from the one way system then probably Taxis and Private Hire vehicles will also be permitted. As we know taxi drivers are the new Just-Eat & Deliveroo drivers. So they will be able to drive both ways into Upper Corn Street to collect the take-away deliveries from the fast food outlets located on the street but not us. Chaos!!!

RAT RUN A Corn Street speedy Rat Run will take place at the end of the working day with drivers exiting the town as the normal semi-congested Traffic-Calming traffic in Upper Corn Street will be gone!

ATFERTHOUGHT I feel the One Way system would make business in Corn Street an afterthought as access would be after they have done there in-town shopping.

116

These changes are apparently being made with cycling and walking Active Travel as the main reason but the One Way & Bus Lane is really for a completely different reason. Being located in Upper Corn Street near the pinch-point by Market Sq for 20+yrs and observing bus’s, cars, cycles and pedestrians, this is not needed!

Re Witney Active Travel Scheme and its impact on Corn Street

We have recently, November 2020, moved into [redacted] Corn St and were rather surprised to learn, through a chance conversation with a neighbour, of the proposed road changes which will have an enormous effect on us. Our first bone of contention is to ask why we were not informed of the proposals.

The consultation period opened on January 21st and closes on February 11th. If the consultation is to have any merit surely it should have a wider and longer consultation period with public meetings.

We recently made enquiries with both Oxfordshire County Council, Highways and WODC Planning Department, regarding parking outside our home and none of the replies mentioned the proposed ‘Travel Scheme.’

#17 Resident, Witney As residents surely you can’t take away our right to load and unload outside our home. It is not safe or practical to carry shopping or whatever across two lanes of traffic or to help the elderly/disabled or very young children.

We are described as a leisure business on the attached map. We are a domestic property paying WODC Council tax. We wonder what else could be wrong with the information in the consultation.

How can Holloway Road be made one way without a proper facility for turning at the closed end? How would a lorry or other large vehicle manage to turn around?

Have the traders been consulted? I spoke with the newsagent and they had not been advised, neither had the Italian Deli both of whom will potentially lose half their passing trade and this at a time when Witney town has lost a lot of retail traders and is in danger of becoming something of a ghost town. Surely you need to be

117

assisting the traders not penalising them by taking away parking spaces and making part of Corn Street one way.

I note traffic counters have been installed on various roads. How can any useful data be collected at the moment unless you are monitoring the effect of a pandemic on traffic levels.

The consultation document states. Corn Street between Holloway Road and Market Square has both a narrow road and paths. This is incorrect. Corn St has wide road and footpaths at least as far as Swan Court. There is absolutely no need to deprive residents of Witney or visitors of this valuable parking on the North side.

The consultation document states. Measures are proposed to create a cross-town active travel route between Tower Hill in the west and Madley Park in the east. This will encompass the Five Ways roundabout, Corn Street, Market Square, Langdale Gate, Langel Common and Church Lane. Church Lane is a narrow 2 way street with parking on one side. Not the best place to encourage more cyclists. Also has anyone conducted a survey to find out how many people are likely to want to use the route from Tower Hill to Madley Park? The often busy footpath across Langel Common is currently shared by cyclists and pedestrians without adequate space for either. Has anyone done a count of the cyclists riding into Witney? Along Corn St it is very few less than 5 per hour I feel sure. I rarely see any cyclists apart from about 3 paper boys at 7.30am.

The loss of parking spaces on the north side of Corn St will mean more pressure on parking on adjacent residential roads where spaces are already difficult especially for residents with no private parking facilities available.

We are all for progress and improvement and support the speed limit becoming 20mph but the imposition of the other drastic changes will seriously affect the quality of life for many residents and we are strongly opposed to the changes in Corn St. Not enough consideration has been given to how it will impact on the quality of life of residents, especially the older ones, and the ability of traders to continue to operate with a reduced footfall. Also deliveries for traders, particularly by draymen, will be impossible with loading/unloading prohibited on the North side.

118

Thank you for reading this.

I am writing with some observations on the proposals to introduce “Active Travel Measures in Witney” a scheme supported financially by the government and OXLEP. I read that the scheme is design to support economic recovery and enable people to travel safely; and a long term ambition is to plan for “walking and cycling to become the norm”.

This entire expensive project seems to rest on the unfounded presumption that there is a substantial pent up demand in Witney for such cycle routes, and that the proposals for a Tower Hill to Madley Park cycle and pedestrian route will meet that demand. I feel that the plans proposed will be of some assistance to a few people but at the expense and inconvenience to the many who will be affected by them.

I hope consideration is being given to the matter of who will pay for any restitution of the current arrangements should the proposed scheme not prove a success.

My remarks will be confined to those sections of the routes that I am particularly familiar with.

#18 Resident, Witney 1. Tower Hill. I think it is a mistake to plan for shared cycle and pedestrian ‘pathways’, both there and elsewhere. In most parts of the country it is illegal to cycle on town pavements, for obvious reasons. The current signalised crossing on Tower Hill seems to be very effective, so why change it to a toucan crossing?

2. Five Ways roundabout. How are you planning to widen the “refuge islands” without narrowing the road widths, and thus causing delays to critical point?

3. Corn Street (Five Ways to Holloway Road). I hope you do nothing to reduce the number of parking spaces here. My impression is that this is the only place where the residents of that section of Corn Street can park their cars. During the day these spaces, if not used by residents, then possibly by visiting friends or those who may be calling on businesses in Corn Street. 4. (Holloway Road to market Square). You say that this section has both narrow roads and paths. This is not strictly correct as half the section – that is, from Holloway Road to Swan Court has some of the widest pavements in Witney.

119

I think it is a serious mistake to create a one-way system for cars wishing to access Swan Court and Marlborough Lane by having to approach from the Market end Only. Quite apart from the inconvenience, this would entail, collectively, thousands of extra miles annually for those driving from Swan Court to the town centre to supermarkets for shopping, banking, the weekly market, etc. All this increase in traffic will contribute to congestion at the Five Ways roundabout and the roundabout at the T-junction where Welch Way meets High Street. Already at certain times of the day there are almost solid lines of traffic between these roundabouts.

However, I do think it is a good idea after your review, to remove the “build outs” in Corn Street as these are daily causes of delay, and at busy times traffic can queue for almost two hundred yards from the Market Square entrances back along Corn Street, the traffic jam being almost entirely due to the “build outs”. It seems sensible to install a zebra crossing in Corn Street at Marlborough Lane point. Have you given enough consideration to the parents and the children who are delivered to and collected from the Batt School at Marlborough Lane entrances in Corn Street?

I foresee real difficulties for businesses in the one-way section as proposed in Corn Street: there are pubs and businesses on both sides of the road that regularly require lorries and vans to make deliveries. I am not sure exactly what is proposed in the plans that will ensure a sensible parking/unloading arrangement on both sides of the street.

From medieval to modern times there have been only two streets that led both residents and visitors into and out of Witney in both directions, the High Street and Corn Street. The proposed new plan destroys this established tradition which has proved its benefits for residents, visitors and businesses for centuries in exchange for what is only a theoretical and modest gain for cyclists.

Witney, like many other towns and cities in the country, is in the process of losing many of the well- established national companies once familiar to us all, and with them other local businesses, I am afraid, will not survive the constraints imposed by the covid epidemic.

What I would like to read is of plans by the various councils that have influence in determining the economic health and wellbeing of Witney that show how they are using every resource and imaginative ideas to encourage and sustain businesses that remain in the town and make it as attractive as possible for new

120

investors. The plans as proposed by O.C.C for their Active Travel measures will have the opposite effect, and, instead of supporting “economic recovery” which is a priority aim of the plan, will reduce Witney to a less attractive town both for residents and visitors.

RE - Witney Active Travel Scheme Consultation

We are writing in response to the Witney Active Travel Scheme, and the letter through our door advising of Oxfordshire County Council's proposals.

We would wish to applaud the efforts of the plan to improve cycling in the town, and the majority of the proposals are a welcome addition to Witney.

However, as a resident of Weavers Close we strongly object to the closure of Holloway Road to traffic from Corn Street.

Holloway Road provides a vital route for the small number of residents of the Crofts, Weavers Close and Swan Court who need to use it in order to access Welch Way, Bridge Street or Witney East. Without this we will need to leave Corn Street at Fiveways roundabout. #19 Resident, Witney Traffic accessing the Fiveways roundabout from Corn Street is frequently queuing during the busy times, often backed up to the Crofts. This roundabout is busy with vehicles moving from Welch Way, Tower Hill and Curbridge Road all of which having priority past Corn Street to Ducklington Lane.

The traffic alterations proposed will increase traffic using the Fiveways roundabout from Welch Way and so further inhibit access out of Corn Street by the residents of The Crofts and lower Corn Street.

Additionally, the closure of vehicular access towards the Buttercross from Fiveways roundabout we also object to. The issue on this top section is not the number of cars using it, we happily cycle along it, but the parked cars on double yellow lines outside the food outlets, estate agents, bookmakers etc which coupled with the traffic calming measures does cause huge issues especially if buses are involved. Has consideration been given to reversing the proposal i.e. preventing access down from Buttercross to Fiveways, surely this option would reduce the amount of stationary traffic leading to Fiveways, and reduce the number of cars parked directly outside the food outlets?

121

We chose to live in the centre of Witney so that we would not need to use our car very often and walk/cycle, however a weekly food shop for four prohibits us from these modes of transport. With the proposal the route to a supermarket say Waitrose as a resident of Weavers Close would mean that we would need to drive down Corn Street, along Ducklington Lane, Station Lane, Witan Way, or along Welch Way, up the High Street and along Langdale Gate. This is madness when we live so close to Waitrose! These new routes would be incredibly convoluted, they are already heavily congested, especially at peak times and surely the pollution from all these additional vehicles sitting in traffic is going to significantly increase. This is certainly not conducive to a pleasant walking and cycling environment for Witney residents.

I therefore urge the scheme to leave Holloway Road open for residents of The Crofts, Weavers Close and upper Corn Street to continue to use, and retain access up to the Buttercross from Fiveways.

Thank you for your letter about the proposed Active Travel measures in Witney. I live on Corn Street at [redacted], between Five Ways to Holloway Road, and wish to provide my feedback.

It sounds like an excellent plan to promote health as well as tackle traffic and pollution in Witney Town Centre, and I want to start by saying that I hugely welcome this initiative - and having spoken to several neighbours about it (via WhatsApp, I must add!) I know that other Corn Street residents welcome it too. The High Street has already been much more pleasant from being closed to most traffic this last year and I hope that continues, as I think it’ll be well positioned for the economic recovery if it does - it’s a much nicer place for pedestrians.

#20 Resident, Witney Regarding the proposals for our stretch of Corn Street, I enthusiastically support the reduction of the speed limit to 20mph - my partner and I have felt for a while that the road can be too fast, too loud and unsafe - much more so than we expected when we moved here. In fact, we’ve agreed that we probably wouldn’t have bought our house, knowing what we know now about the speed of the road and how limited the parking provision can be (when we’re not in lockdown, mainly).

Which brings me on to two suggestions & concerns:

The first concern is how any new speed limits will be enforced. Many residents will be able to tell you that there is a sizeable minority of drivers who do not respect the speed limit as it stands, and will do well in

122

excess of 30mph. Every hour of the day you can hear people tearing through at very high speeds - especially in the evenings, when it can sound like a race track. My question would be that if they don’t respect a 30mph speed limit now, what would make these same drivers respect a 20mph one? I think there’s a sense that speed limits are just something that is not enforced and nothing to worry about, to some. It’d be good to know if any consideration has been given to enforcement of the new 20mph zone to give people confidence in the Active Travel initiative and using the cycle lanes.

The second is how it mentions a review of the parking road markings, and I wanted to make you aware of how tight that can already be for residents of this stretch of road. My partner and I share one car and rarely use it even before the pandemic, but we do need to keep it somewhere and we bought the house in good faith that we’d be able to. Some of the bays opposite were already removed a couple of years ago due to the new development that went up, and since the bays are so often full (with people waiting for the Water Margin takeaway, for example), we’re already used to having to use Corn Bar, Orchard Way or even Queen’s Dyke - all of which can also fill up, which is why some people park on the single yellow overnight (fine if you’re out in your car every day, but we aren’t).

It definitely feels a bit quieter and easier to park since the lockdown, but I’m worried that if any further bays are removed, then once things open up there’ll simply be nowhere to put our car. There were times before Covid where we’d have to drive around the block in a circle waiting for a space to come up. If the overall aim with the one-way systems etc is to discourage people from driving in to town via Corn Street, perhaps you could consider re-provisioning the existing bays with permits for residents only? There is ample free parking elsewhere in town.

Thanks and best of luck with this great initiative.

I and emailing you to voice my concerns over the current proposal to change Corn Street to a bus and cycle lane. I own The Red Lion on Corn Street and feel this will be detrimental to numerous businesses along corn street. We all have deliveries daily and this will be a logistical nightmare for us all receiving supplies and #21 customers collecting their food . This will apply to the numerous takeaways also situated on Corn street.

Please take into consideration that we have had a really tough year and do not need any more disruption to our businesses.

123

Maybe a 20 mile an hour limit that is enforced within the town centre and around church green that has 3 schools feeding from it should be considered.

Many thanks for taking the time to read my email

My name is [redacted] and I’m a Witney resident and local business person.

Just as a quick intro, my main business is in management consultancy, and specifically problem solving. My clients include HSBC, Virgin Atlantic, AXA Healthcare and some others. Pre-pandemic, I would travel to their various offices and work with all levels, from CEO to frontline workforce, and solve huge problems that face them and their customers. And I mean huge. The effects of the work has been unconsciously, and sometimes very consciously felt by their many millions of customers, and I’m proud to say, many thousands of staff. However, in this last year I’m also proud to say I’ve cut my carbon footprint by about 20,000 miles (not to mention flights) and even returned a car to the leasing company! Because, like my clients, we’ve adapted and are now successfully working from home.

Why am I telling you this? Well, I want to give you a sense of my credibility (haha that sounds really pompous, sorry) as I try and articulate the next part of this email. #22

I’ve read through the proposals and think they’re all great, except for the slight concern over additional road signs potentially. I don’t know if you’re on some of the local fb groups such as Witney Memories, but my goodness, if you do a then and now photo comparison of the streets they just look a mess of council signage these days compared to maybe 30 years ago. Anyway, I’m all for ‘20 is plenty’ speed restrictions, and maybe even cycle paths marked out on the roads. But feel I must object to the Corn Street plans.

In addition to my main business, my family have owned and grown Fat Lil’s (a live music venue and restaurant/bar) at 64-64a Corn Street for 14 years. My wife and sons run that business, but as you can imagine, I’ve spent hundreds of days there myself. Therefore I feel I have a sincerely qualified and objective view of the realities of Corn Street and how it functions for the town.

124

In its pre-pandemic state, traffic flow would build in a mainly westerly direction from 7.30am. Largely made up of commercial vehicles doing deliveries etc. From 8.30am parents start to arrive from the west (5 ways roundabout) to drop their kids off at school. Most using the parking outside Fat Lil’s etc. By 9.30am things calm down quite significantly until 3pm school leaving time for 45 mins or so. From 5pm traffic builds massively heading west to east, because the two takeaway shops at the Market Square end of Corn St open and their delivery drivers and customers, knowing the traffic wardens finish work at 5pm, ignore the double yellow lines and park, on this, the only narrow section on the whole length of Corn St. Consequently, the oncoming traffic (east to west) which has right of way, gets stuck at the very, very narrow section at the start of the street. It is genuine chaos sometimes. I know, because I also own The Eagle Tavern pub on this section of the road and get to watch it unfold.

However, the volume of traffic subsides significantly by 6.30pm, and even though the ‘illegal’ parking continues all night, it’s no longer a problem because the traffic simply isn’t there.

Having spent thousands of hours on Corn St in all seasons, I can also testify that no more than about 50 people would normally be seen cycling around Witney and Corn St on any given day. And I’m one of them. I live in Cogges and cycle or walk there at all times. Usually, like most, only cycling in warm/dry weather. There are several bicycle locking post/points between Market Square and Holloway Road, and they’re never filled. Again, I know, because I park my bike there with its Eagle Tavern (butcher’s boy style) signage.

The problem with bikes is, if you ride into town, you’re probably (hopefully) going to buy something. It then makes it hard/dangerous to ride home. Therefore people don’t do it.

We’ve managed to stay partially open at Fat Lil’s during the pandemic by reinventing ourselves a number of times, and this has led to me being there on occasion, and as you can imagine the traffic is very quiet at all times now.

My aforementioned main work is also showing me that post-pandemic, nearly all of the UK’s biggest organisations are planning on maintaining the gains (mostly financial through reduced office space/parking etc and reduced sickness) they’re seeing with home working. Maybe your’s is too? Therefore, it’s unlikely

125

we’ll ever see the pre-pandemic rather modest levels of traffic on Corn St.

Also, if the proposed one-way system was introduced, the guys at the two takeaways and their customers would still park outside their shops from 5pm and the empty buses would continue to have nightly stand-offs.

Literally nothing would be achieved. And perversely, there would be a potential increase in traffic pollution as people (the majority that travel to Batts school) would have to drive down Welch Way from the west and back down the High St (assuming it’s ever reopened... but why put more traffic on it if it is? Surely that’s endangering more shoppers/pedestrians on narrower pavements?) or Witan Way. Which adds about 1 mile per journey.

In my daily work I specialise in solving problems by taking organisations over 3 large steps. First we conduct some thorough Research by engaging as many people as possible and measuring all sorts of things to understand all the current factors and potential cause/effect relationships. We then devise a list of Experiments and conduct them under close scrutiny so we can test our theories, hopes and hypothesis. We then reject or modify what hasn’t worked and roll-out the successful experiments into ‘normal life’.

I fear that the proposed plans don’t follow this successful model, and should they prove harmful, won’t be reversed.

Additionally, I worry that it’s too soon/early to experiment with the valid ambition of encouraging walking and cycling by implementing a change that will effect thousands of people, to potentially benefit (genuinely) a handful.

I’m really sorry for the length of this note, but the last point I can think of is this; I am a cyclist. And I’ve never felt any concerns with riding through Witney. But I have just turned 50, and it’s noticeable that cyclists of my generation appear to be a bit more ‘old school’.... in that we actually ride on the road, use hand signals and generally use our eyes and ears.

This evening, my wife and I went out on our daily 4 mile(ish) stroll, which happened to take us down Corn St from Five Ways roundabout to Market Square. It was around 6pm and in the 1/2 mile length of Corn St, we were passed by about I’d say no more than 20

126

cars. But also 3 cyclists... all using the pavement instead of the empty road, and even though it was dark, none had lights on.

So, again, I’m sorry for the length of this email. But I’d also like to offer my services in perhaps providing any data to substantiate my claims for you to prevent a one way system. I can’t think of a single good example of one way benefiting any town’s businesses, can you? Need I say Oxford?!

As I mentioned earlier, I support the ‘risk free’ proposals in the rest of the plan. But I think it’s too fresh after (fingers crossed) Covid to interfere with the very fabric of a town.

If you’d like to discuss my views and maybe even take me up on the offer of providing data (absolutely free),

In relation to the introduction of Active Travel measures in Witney I would like to make comments on the part of the plan that is immediately relevant to ourselves as residents at the Eastern side of the proposed new active travel route, and a few other observations that I feel could be relevant to the creation of the cross- town active travel route between Tower Hill in the west and Madley Park in the east.

Re: Langel Common area. The introduction to your letter mentioned the Covid-19 pandemic and with that in mind your plan to propose an increase in foot and cycle traffic across the common with only an ‘improvement’ to the existing path and a review of the lighting seems to me insufficient to encourage more people to utilise the E-W route safely.

#23 When there are no cyclists the total path width is sufficient for pedestrians to maintain a two metre distance. Currently there is not sufficient width to maintain the suggested social distance at busy times and with an increase in use by more cyclists and pedestrians, there definitely would not be sufficient width to maintain the required social distancing. A large part of the pedestrian traffic are mothers with young children and pushchairs which take up the main width of the pedestrian ‘side’ of the path and these families regularly stop on the bridges to watch and often feed the ducks on the river. This can cause cyclists to either swerve or stop to avoid accidents. Add to this many dog walkers, elderly people who may not be able to move too quickly, and disabled people using motorised buggies and the existing path is often fully utilised. Moving forward hopefully to a time when we no longer need to be social distanced an increase in traffic could mean four rows of moving traffic which would be extremely unsafe on a path of the existing width.

127

Re: Church Lane We are residents of Meadow View a development of seventeen houses off Church Lane. To promote extra cycling and pedestrian traffic could cause an increase in problems on exiting Meadow View by motorised vehicle.

There was once a clearly defined broken white line to mark the junction across Meadow View which has over the years been partly eradicated so much so that if anyone parked their vehicle on Church Lane near this junction I think they might be justified in the eyes of the law to feel they were not contravening the Highway Code in parking close by the entrance to Meadow View.

Rule 243 of the Highway Code states:- Do not stop or park opposite or within 10 metres of a junction except in an authorised parking space. I and many other residents have regularly had to pull out from the junction to more than half way across Church Lane only to have to reverse quickly to avoid an oncoming vehicle which had not been previously visible due to parked vehicles .

As the existing junction is not clearly marked by a broken white line could I please ask that as a first step to any changes made in Church Lane to promote Active Travel that a broken white line be repainted to clearly define the turning and perhaps solid white lines painted to forbid parking for 10 metres either side of Meadow View entrance?

Church Lane is already an extremely busy thoroughfare used by cyclists, parents with children using the route to access the primary school on the Cogges development and naturally many others who use the route into the town centre.

Our problem with cars parking in Church Lane has developed as the town has grown and people wanting to be able to leave their cars conveniently close to a bus route to utilise public transport into Oxford and beyond.

This problem is going to increase with the planned housing development for the area and if Woodford Way car park is going to be sold for property development then with less parking in the town centre for commuters, side roads like Church Lane could be significantly affected.

128

Might it be possible to arrange a public meeting to enable local residents to meet members of the county council to ask questions and discuss these proposals more fully, as I feel sure there will be residents in other areas that will be more aware of problems that could arise in their localities.

[B. Support]

We are very interested to read about the Active Travel measures being proposed for our neighbourhood. We are in agreement with all suggestions and hope this contributes towards a safer environment for all.

Our reason for contacting you is on a more personal note. We live at [house number redacted], Woodbank which is on the corner of Woodbank and Woodgreen path. Our property was built 4 years ago and our house and garden are lower than the Woodgreen path. We are extremely concerned that any improvements to the surface of the path do not cause any extra rain run off to be directed towards our property. The builder provided edging stones along the boundary and we would like you to assure us that sufficient attention would be given to providing an adequate drainage solution for this area. We are very happy to discuss this #2 Resident, Witney concern on site and have left contact details at the end of this email.

We are the only domestic property to border both the path and the road. Recently we have managed to secure through Oxfordshire Highways a bollard at the end of Woodgreen path adjacent to the school entrance. This was because motor vehicles had been using the path as a cut through to Madley Brook Estate but when they reached the area beside our house, they realised there was no turning facility. We have observed over the years numerous dangerous manoeuvres which have put human and property safety at risk. The reason for bringing this to your attention is to ensure our hard won efforts to promote a safe area for walkers and cyclists is not altered.

129

Table 2: Responses received to Witney Active Travel consultation question 8. Specifically, what impact do you think the Holloway Road proposal will have on your business or organisation?

RESPONDENT COMMENTS

[A. Objections & Concerns]

We need all roads fully open to all vehicles other wise the town will just get blocked up with traffic everyone Resident of Witney should have full access cycles pay no tax why should they be put 1st!

The top of Corn Street will not be improved by making it one way. It will add to problems rather than reduce Resident of Witney them.

Resident of the It’s a waste of money surrounding area

Holloway Road is not on a bus route but there are occasions when it is necessary to divert services. I accept that Welch Way is the normal diversion route but the town service in particular could be affected especially if Resident of Witney routes were to change in the

District nurses will need to be able to travel in a car to residents living in that section as unable to carry good Resident of Witney/ to these people you reside in homes in that area. Need to ensure a scheme that allows access to cars for Healthcare worker essential healthcare

130

We run a charity delivering food and furniture. Any restriction upon our vans will worsen our ability to Resident of Witney/ respond to need. Shuting roads because of cyclists will be bad for our charity Local charity

The current cycle path arrangements are flawed, the are poorly designed on pathways to narrow for cyclists Resident of Witney and walkers to share.

Corn street down to Tower Hill roundabout gets jammed at 5pm weekdays (pre-covid). Having to join that queue from The Crofts, instead of being able to turn right through town or over to Holloway Road will impact Resident of Witney residents in this area

Closing the road will create more traffic on Corn street and Welch way Resident of Witney

Resident from A scheme designed to spend available funds surrounding area

I use Holloway Road quite often. It is not a rat run, but toomany cars are parked on the road. Resident of Witney

Resident of Witney Only real locals know about this cut through- going to close all roads to non locals

Resident of Witney The whole scheme is a total waste of ratepayers money, the roads are only busy at odd times of the day, and is an example of what happens when you give individuals power, they will always abuse it. 131

With parked cars all the way down it’s hazardous for pedestrians and cyclists Resident of Witney

Closing Holloway Road will seriously impact on trucks being able to service my loading bay in Holloway road Business owner as they would be unable to turn around to leave and would have to reverse all the way back down Holloway Road. My clients are used to accessin

Resident of Witney This scheme has not been thought through

Resident of Witney it hasn't been thought through. If done it will be reversed!

Resident from I use this route rarely surrounding area

You will be the creators of a rat run,therefore your creation is wrong. Holloway rd is currently a quiet road Resident from and safe as is. If you need to close this road as a result of your changes then your changes are incorrect! A surrounding area bit like closing burford high st to HGV,now the surrounding villages and roads are being damaged,a rat run produced through another bad decision.

I feel closing Holloway Road and Corn street will produce a rise in traffic to Bridge street and Ducklington Lane, both of these are already bottles necks for traffic but those wishing to reach the supermarket, leisure Resident of Witney centre or just opposite sides of town will all be forced to queue on the same two sections of road.

Business owner Hi I am a local business newsagents on corn street I deliver 1000 papers a day in witney and surrounding 132

villages .me my drivers and my staff paperboys will be highly impacted by this scheme and I am totally against it for cycle and bus Lane only . My delivery big truck once a week comes and is parked Infront on the road and driver delivers goods inside the shop as there is no other way to get delivery at all My drivers come 5 am in the morning and get ready there rounds and park there too

Unless double yellow lines are placed along the top left hand side parking will still accumulate along the side of the Three Horseshoes pub, and the only way to turn would be to reverse into Applegarth Court (which is a Resident of Witney private road). The consultation states that there will be no impact or change to emergency vehicles. Are the council envisaging a rising/falling bollard here to allow entry and exit. There is a police station at the foot of Holloway Road using it for quick central access.

Resident of Witney I drive along Holloway Road occasionally to link between Welch Way and Corn Street.

We are all for less traffic and for more walk ways, but your scheme has not considered the impact on the existing residents. We have a strong feeling you are planning to steam roller this through with little or no concern for the residents of Holloway Road and Applegarth Court. Your proposal is to allow access from Resident of Witney Welch Way only.

This means every vehicle entering Holloway Road will be parked facing up and pointing to the Corn Street end. This will especially disadvantage the existing residents.

Holloway Road is narrow and esp with elderly/disabled people's bungalows they need access. Concerned Resident of Witney that if road is blocked then some will have more difficulty accessing their homes

Representative from a Paths do not need widening Closing Holloway Rd will be a disaster How will Ambulances & fire engines group or organisation get through & Refuse Vechicles turn round 133

I support the change to one-way the zebra crossing by Marlborough Lane.We are concerned that removing the build-outs will increase speeds with one-way traffic. If the build-outs are removed the bike parking in that Resident of Witney section of Corn Street will be lost and needs replacing. Also a zebra crossing will be required at the Market Place end to allow people to cross there easily.If the build-outs remain it would be good buses and cycles going against the one way flow have priority

The scheme is a good start for what's needed in Witney but clearly these proposals do not go far enough. Resident of Witney We need to stop thinking that roads are safe spaces for cyclists. Would you be happy for your children to cycle on the road? All cyclists and pedestrians should have separate and segregated infrastructure.

Holloway Road allows a circular route to avoid the narrower end of Corn Street which can be congested with Buses. The Market Square at the moment is closed to traffic so most customers come in from the 5 ways Business owner end of Corn Street and to avoid a U-turn in a busy street to return westward it is safer to take left turn into Holloway Road to exit the town back to the A40 Oxford /Burford.

Resident of Witney I rarely use Holloway Road at present.

Resident of Witney accessing health centre and shops more difficult as high street closed to traffic

Resident of Witney Turning area for large delivery vehicles. Residents cars are parked on both sides of the road and if a large vehicle e.g. bin lorry visited it would have to reverse out!

134

Restricting access to Holloway Road is going to be disastrous to residents and businesses. People are Resident of Witney going to have difficult journeys and there is going to be even longer journey's but also impact on businesses have been ill thought through. As the Landlord of the Eagle tavern we rely heavily on passing traffic be it on foot or vehicles, Business owner This proposal will be crippling to all corn street businesses, who for obvious reasons are already having a tough year. The proposed unloading outside my businesses will have a huge impact for all my suppliers delivery most Business owner days! As the High Street is closed to traffic Holloway Road and Welch way provide an alternative route to East Witney. With the proposed development in East Witney there will be even more traffic travelling in that Resident of Witney direction. The only way from town to East Witney will be via Witan Way which is already like a car park in normal times. Even the Shores Green project will not alleviate these issues. If its harder to drive up corn Street a lot of people will just not go there. Resident of Witney Also traffic is bad enough throughout the town without closing more of roads. I dont understand why cyclists csnnot use the cycle paths slready provided instead of costs and nuisance of Corn St changes. At Five Ways roundabout use the cyvlr path to where the old Lidl was. Follow the cycle Resident of Witney path to the Leys. At Station Lane use the cycle path to the cycle path to Langel. I feel you are inventing a problem that doesnt exist regarding Corn St. You just need signage. If rules were adhered to already then cyclists and buses would still suffer the same pitfalls and is likely that this would contribute to businesses closing in corn street as less footfall would occur if they can only park Resident of Witney vehicles at Marriott's or Waitrose. If people want to walk or cycle they will do so already, covid has not encouraged employees who drop children at schools then drive on to work to abandon their vehicles. A slower speed limit is good but limiting vehicles is not. My customers drive to witney bringing in people to use the local shops. If it becomes annoying to get to my Business owner salon they may either look elsewhere and choose to shop in another town.

Holloway Rd and Corn Street being one way will impact Saxon Way. Far more traffic will come down here. Resident of Witney We already have an issue over the past year where people are parking all along the road and then walking up to town. The street is much busier than it used to be.

135

Witney will be gridlocked in other areas, bad enough now! No passing trade or pick up takeout. Delivery Resident of Witney lorries?

Resident from Witney high street, restaurants are already struggling to make ends meet due to covid 19 closures, these surrounding area measures will put people off getting takeaways from places down corn street because of the hassle.

I use Holloway Road several times a week on my bike and there is almost always a problem with sharing space where I sometimes have to mount the pavement. I am disappointed that there is no change to the 2 Resident of Witney roundabouts for cyclists. It would seem that by putting in the small measures at 5 Ways roundabout it is suggesting it is ok to cycle there but I feel it hasn't taken away any of the danger really so I will continue to avoid it by taking a longer route. I would like to see real change here.

This is terrible crippling businesses and making peoples homes inaccessible, awful idea. How about Resident of Witney stopping people parking on the double yellow lines down corn street and provide residents with parking! Take your green new deal build back better [redacted] away and spend our time and money on actually Resident of Witney helping people in the town. Your continued support for lockdown measures is devastating small local business and now this. Get a grip Emergency access needs to be considered, this is not just for ‘blue light’ vehicles but private vehicles Resident of Witney belonging to firefighters responding to the station for a call.

Resident of Witney I don't feel that Holloway Road is the biggest issue here.

I think this will be very detrimental to many of the businesses in this area and problems for people getting Resident of Witney the children to and from school

Holloway rd does provide a cut through for some, but closing it would place more pressure on the already Resident of Witney very congested roundabout at the end of welch way (five ways)

136

I live on holloway road....so for me to get my daughter to school i will have to travel down to welch way..along ducklington lane then onto station lane and eventually join the que to get along church green... Resident of Witney Then later in the afternoon when i need to go to work my evening shift...i will have to try and get across the road at welchway to travel round to the woolgate carpark...have you seen the traffic along welchway at 4.30 !!!!

First, the scheme will fail to deliver sustainable routes, as motorists still have priority where the route intercepts a road. This symbolizes the importance give versus the car. Residents of Witney On Holloway road , it will improve the feel having less traffic, the impact on residents will be minor over less than 500m of the route, which if made by car is a few seconds extra to go around. From West Witney I always cycle into town via Corn Street, parked cars/built outs slow the traffic. One way throughout town.

[B. Support]

Making corn street west bound only (or that end) is great idea. As a cyclist and walker I often see and have Resident of Witney experienced cars trying to squeeze through despite priority being west bound. Additionally would reduce cars in town centre promote walking

I am not a resident in Holloway Road but I think the proposals would benefit the people who are - it would also be safer as cars at present can travel two ways but because of parked cars if you meet something Resident of Witney coming from the opposite direction the one travelling towards Welch Way often strides the pavement tomoass

As a resident of Corn Street, I believe the elimination of the “rat run” effect of Holloway Road would greatly improve the quality of life for myself and other Corn St residents with reduced noise and danger from traffic. Resident of Witney It would be a welcome sight.

137

Representative from a Reduces non-residential traffic in a residential street - GOOD group or organisation

I rarely drive along Holloway Road so as a pedestrian, I imagine it will be easier to cross safely and Resident of Witney quieter/less polluted which is positive.

Anything that encourages cycling and walking will be ultimately positive for all as it will bring down Resident of Witney emissions, obesity and diabetes as well as increase mental health. Saving the planet and the NHS.

Windrush Bike Project Reduction in motor traffic making cycling more pleasant

Table 3: Responses received to Witney Active Travel consultation question 11. Specifically, what impact do you think the Corn Street proposal will have on your business or organisation?

RESPONDENT COMMENTS

[A. Objections & Concerns]

How to kill the town traffic will noway to go and block the town. Please don't do this! Resident of Witney

Resident of Witney Traffic will be even mor whittle necked

138

The illegal parking on double-yellow lines, at top end of Corn Street, might be addressed. Particularly Resident of Witney problematic in the evenings. It's currently dangerous as traffic is obstructed and vehicles are often forced onto the pavement to get passed. Too little enforcement by WODC and Police.

Corn Street will not be improved by making part of it one way and will have an adverse effect on Holloway Resident of Witney Road. Buses are the danger to cyclists not cars or small delivery vehicles.

I feel the high street being closed to traffic has been a brilliant initiative. However, not allowing traffic to go Resident of Witney between Holloway Road and the leisure centre will push traffic onto the main ring road - which would be fine, if this road in itself wasn’t heavily congested.

Resident of the It’s a waste of money surrounding area

My only concern is that the build out closest to market Square should stay otherwise there would be a Resident of Witney dangerous negative impact on pedestrians crossing the road here

Resident of Witney/ I own several properties and businesses in corn st we need constant motor access to the street. The street business owner has suffered by years of road narrows double yellow lines etc.

I live at [redacted] Corn Street. I currently use my car to drive to work at Carterton [redacted]. Parking in Resident of Witney Corn Street is problematic as it is. I think the new scheme sounds very good on the whole, but I would like to know how I will be able to get in and out of the street and where I will park

139

My major concern with this proposal is the potential increase in traffic to the high street as a result of a one Resident of Witney way system. I travel from the crofts to church green so will have to either go via high street or witan way. I still support a one way system as the benefits outweigh the negatives

Marlborough lane provides access to many properties, a school, two bank car parks, a pub car park, a hotel Resident of Witney car park, citizens advice bureau car park, scout hut. Only one vehicle can enter or leave the narrow lane at a time, restricting access to corn street will just create more congestion.

Resident of the The alternative route is much longer - more miles, more pollution, more congestion on alternative roads surrounding area

More pleasant environment for the public calling on businesses. Representative from a Concern re goods delivery drop-off facilities (eastern end) as the road is very narrow. group or organisation Does the eastern end have sufficient room for buses, cars, cyclists & pedestrians to operate side by side?

I work in a business just of corn street not being able to travel in both direction to get to work is essential and Resident of Witney and by making it one way it will increase my travel time. It’s a terrible idea not that many people cycle as we business owner people live far away from the centre off bus routes & too far to cycle.

I drive from Woodford Mill to Waitrose or Sainsbury's via Holloway Road and Corn Street. It is relatively Resident of Witney quick and economical.

Business owner ONE WAY SYSTEM WOULD MAKE CORN STREET SHOPS A SECOND THOUGHT AS PEOPLE WILL BE DRIECTED INTO TOWN AND THEN OUT VIA CORN STREET

Resident of Witney Cars often don’t give way to on coming cyclists on the bumps where there is traffic priority in one direction . Parked cars make it difficult for cyclists as they have to pull out into the traffic. 140

I do not believe that this is a good use of funds. Pedestrianised the high Street would be more productive, Resident of Witney leaving corn st as it is.

Taking away the build out sections is long overdue but converting Corn Street with a one way system will not Business owner work. If it ain't broke - don't fix it. How are Businesses in Corn Street supposed to have deliveries of merchandise? This seriously affects residents of Swan Court, Marlborough Lane as well

Resident of Witney This scheme will be extremely difficult for deliveries

Resident of Witney this is a foolish scheme. DELIVERIES WILL BE A NIGHTMARE,

Resident from the I don't use this route very often surrounding area

I visit elderly parents who live on corn street. I'm happy corn street will be 20mph but loosing parking will Resident from the have a big impact on the lives of everyone who lives there where they are already having to keep moving surrounding area cars about the town centre during the day due to 2 hour parking and no residence parking.

It will increase my journey to work time as I will need to drive up Tower Hill and then join all other traffic on the Burford Road. Which will result in queues especially with the massive increase in the number of homes now on that road too. Trips to Sainsburys for a weekly shop or bulky items from poundstretcher/Argos will Resident of Witney mean joining queues along Ducklington and Station lane. More traffic build up, more pollution. I also feel that charity shops along Corn street will suffer with less donation

141

I am a local shop on corn street newsagents and me my business will be highly impacted as I deliver 1000 papers a day in witney and surroundings my drivers my customers whom many are in there old age needs Business owner to access this road so I am totally against this This will impact my business very badly

I go through Corn Street, in both directions, each time I drive into town. It's the most direct way for me to get Resident of Witney to the main car park behind Waitrose. Any other route would be longer and result in increased fuel consumption and more emissions.

This would be disastrous and totally unnecessary!. Better way to improve Corn St would be to remove road narrowings. Restricting & enforcing parking to one side would allow freer movement of traffic of all sorts. Currently, vehicles are parked both sides, buses/lorries can't get through, 2 cars can't pass, not easy to pass Resident of Witney a cyclist allowing adequate room. Coming from the west of town to get to car parks, would involve going down busy Welch Way or Mill St and using a v busy mini roundabout

My main concern here is whether that means that you will reopen market square to traffic. I would much prefer to see market square remain closed to all traffic as I think that has a great positive impact on our Resident of Witney town. So if closing the end of corn street means reopening market square - don't do it. The traffic moves so slowly at that end of corn street that cyclists are fine just using the road our family often cycles there.

Representative from a We need Traffic both ways in Corn St But the Chacane needs removing group or organisation

I cycle in the summer to Oxford and Corn Street is the most dangerous part of my journey Resident of Witney

142

How on earth are we supposed to operate a successful business if this plan is put into practice - madness!! * restrictions for access to eastbound traffic will mean dangerous U-turns taking place as Business owner customers/deliveries will need to go back to the 5-ways roundabout to exit from Corn Street! * As residents we will have to constantly plan our journey back to our home - what happens to trying to reduce travel, this will cause more mileage to residents in Corn Street - not good for the planet!

Access from the western side of the town to the eastern side via Corn Street will be impossible by vehicle for Resident of Witney many necessary journeys which will need to be made via long diversions via Welch Way, High Street, Witan Way and Langdale Court, or Station Lane and Witan Way.

Resident of Witney not being able to market square and health centre more difficult

Resident of Witney Totally ridiculous!

We are for reducing traffic; the proposal may reduce the traffic flow around corn street but this looks to only Resident of Witney route the traffic to the other areas surrounding such as Welch Way, Holloway road & Witan Way.

By making Corn Street One Way, businesses are going to have very difficult time encouraging people to shop. Corn Street has lost numerous shops, restaurants and pubs over the last fifteen years - a one way Resident of Witney system is only going to make that worse.

It is important that disabled residents have clear parking when they travel along Corn Street. Representative from a One way systems in Market Towns don’t work, look at Abingdon as an example. group or organisation As the Landlord of the Eagle tavern we rely heavily on passing traffic be it on foot or vehicles, Business owner This proposal will be crippling to all corn street businesses, who for obvious reasons are already having a tough year.

143

If people can't drive up there they just won't go. Resident of Witney It's hard enough getting around the town anyway without closing more roads. I dont understand why cyclists csnnot use the cycle paths slready provided instead of costs and nuisance of Corn St changes. At Five Ways roundabout use the cyvlr path to where the old Lidl was. Follow the cycle Resident of Witney path to the Leys. At Station Lane use the cycle path to the cycle path to Langel. I feel you are inventing a problem that doesnt exist regarding Corn St. You just need signage.

Resident of Witney Will be getting rid of customers on both corn street and holly well road not that you give a [redacted]

The existing parking is already incredibly difficult for residents with the 2 hour time restriction. Removal of parking spaces will have a significant impact.

Drivers coming into the town centre from West Witney will drive up Corn Street and then park and walk in as Resident of Witney this is nearer than any of the town centre car parks.

Many parents at Batt School drive along Corn Street to drop off. This is going to cause additional parking issues.

A residents’ parking scheme must be included.

Resident of Witney Less vehicle parking, more rules for access will undoubtedly stop what little footfall corn street already has.

In my view there are only people using bicycles in the warmer months and bus travel is at an all time low. Do you think this is a step back and making it harder for businesses as it is already a struggle for them. When Business owner closing part of the high street for social distancing there was a severe impact to this busnisses. Isn’t that proof this won’t help anyone?

Resident of Witney As before - extra traffic down Saxon Way will be a huge problem.

144

Resident from One way in Corn Street will be crippling for business, it is a crazy idea surrounding area

Visiting businesses based after Holloway Road especially at night. Walking alone to the car would make me Resident of Witney feel nervous.

Resident from You will kill Witney, I'd sooner drive into Oxford than deal with the faff. I suspect a lot of car drivers will feel surrounding area the same way. Stop discriminating against the car driver.

Resident of Witney Stop crippling businesses

We are losing enough businesses in this town. Stop traffic and you stop passing trade thus killing even more Resident of Witney businesses. Corn street’s proposals will not impact too greatly, however, removing the white lines and narrowing the Resident of Witney main lanes to accommodate cycling will not reduce the speed of some vehicles as they race up and down the road currently. Our son attends The Batt. We walk, drive or cycle to school. The zebra crossing is necessary. However as a cyclist who regularly takes the children to school by bike, I've always found enough cycle lanes to get almost Resident of Witney to school. The lack of bike lane on Corn Street doesn't bother me. The junction of Corn Street is dangerous and overused by cars. I'm not sure that limiting cars in one direction will make this any safer for the disruption it will cause. This will be detrimental to all business in corn Street at a time when they are already struggling i can't Resident of Witney actually believe that this is being proposed Very much against this proposal. Far more traffic would have to divert down Corn Street to five ways and then along ducklington lane, to station lane to access the supermarkets. These are already very busy roads Resident of Witney which would not be able to cope with the increased volume of vehicles. The lights at the Tesco Express junction are already under considerable stress at peak times, compounded as well by the drive through McDonald’s traffic. A very poorly thought out proposal.

145

You will be ruining any business that is on cornstreet...especially passing trade ...restricting parking... getting Resident of Witney young children to school safely It must be one way, but to work effectively so must Witan way and Welch way become one way, to all but bikes and pedestrians, creating a one way system into that 'triangle' will also limit local journeys traversing town, exactly the short journey types we should be discouraging by car (but not making impossible) Resident of Witney Cycle lanes that are not segregated or mandatory are not infrastructure.

The plan is neither bold, nor will it achieve what you hope because the proposals are not fit for purpose.

[B. Support]

Resident of the It will have the benefit of reducing traffic currently travelling north through market square and the High Street surrounding area - adding to the opportunity to permanently pedestrianize the High Street.

Buses are often held up by parked vehicles and this part of Corn Street is too narrow for buses to pass when Resident of Witney this occurs. I am pleased that it is still intended that buses will still serve Corn Street in both directions.

As a Corn St resident, again I believe the reduction in speeding and excessive vehicular use on Corn St can Resident of Witney only be positive.

As a resident living just of Corn Street, this will make my weekly drive to the supermarket longer. However, if Resident of Witney this small inconvenience leads to a safer, quieter and less polluted street, I'm happy with that! I hope it will

be effectively monitored to stop drivers breaking the new rules.

Resident of Witney I feel this would have little impact on me

146

Corn street has wide pavements and wide roads. Reorganising the space in a fair manner would allow Resident of Witney separate cycle paths and not the need to keep cyclists in the road. The bus lane at the top is a superb idea!!

Windrush Bike Project Reduction in motor traffic making cycling more pleasant

Resident of Witney Less traffic and lower speeds are always good for the most vulnerable travellers

Councillor Suzanne Bartington, Witney This is a positive change for Corn Street. Ideally more parking needs to be removed as well. North and East

Table 4: Responses received to Witney Active Travel consultation question 16. Please provide any additional comments you have on the active travel scheme for Witney, shown in this map, which haven’t already been covered in your feedback

RESPONDENT COMMENTS

[A. Objections & Concerns]

Too many cycle lanes will mean some of the road's will be closed to car's. Also car lane will be even smaller Resident of Witney with car parked on corn street it's a nightmare already. Traffic will increase due to cycle lanes.

Once again the needs of the villages surrounding Witney are completely ignored when it come to any form Resident from of transport or infrastructure improvements. I would cycle from Aston if I had a safe road to do it on - but the surrounding area only way to avoid potholes is to put myself in direct conflict with cars travelling at up to 60 miles per hour on an unsafe road .... I suspect anyone living in Bampton would say exactly the same. Part time buses,

147

appalling roads .... welcome to village life.

Re- Curbridge Road. Although not specified on this occasion, I feel there are significant improvements to be made with regards to walking and cycling. I regularly walk along the road from Curbridge towards Witney, a lot of the time with my children. The existing path is too narrow to pass others safely, often necessitating one party move on to the road which is clearly dangerous. In addition, we frequently encounter cyclists along this path; again there is not enough width on this path to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. Resident of Witney I feel that widening the path AND creating an additional path on the other side of the road would help ease the difficulties as well as significantly increasing the safety of pedestrians and cyclists alike- especially if one of the paths was dual purpose with a cycle lane as well as space for pedestrians.

Finally, the addition of a footpath or path plus cycle lane on the Curbridge side of Deer Park Road would also be beneficial. If a safe place to cross over the road was also added it would make walking/ cycling/ scooting towards schools and the town centre much safer.

Unsure of the need for another crossing on Tower Hill. Resident of Witney Will the High Street be open to traffic again? Otherwise it’s a very long drive to get from Corn Street all the way round to access Swan Court. With Holloway Road closed that end you would have to go via Ducklington Lane and Station Lane or Welch Way, High Street, Witan Way, past Langdale.... I don’t think that’s very well thought out

Making Corn Street one way will just move the traffic elswhere. Station Lane is already very busy for cars. Resident of Witney

It all very well making more cycling routes but when walking up the leys, church green ,buttercross ,by M&S Resident from you have to dodge people on there bikes because they think they own the right of way. Would it not be surrounding area better to solve this matter first. Also stopping access to to some roads we make it harder for cearers who work in the community , which is a hard enough job anyway. For example your visiting a client down the 148

crofts and your next client is at the top of Holloway road and get to them you have to drive all the way down corn st, onto Welch way then drive all the way up top of Holloway road !!! That's good for the environment ?

Please please consider a crossing of some sort on deer park road by the 4 way roundabout at Richmond Village, West Witney. Parents and children, dog walkers etc. use it all day and it is so dangerous. I personally have had a very close call on numerous occasions walking my puppy - I am incredibly careful when crossing that road but we have nearly been hit on a few occasions now. It’s the only way to walk into Resident of Witney town from the Windrush Place estate and it’s really putting me off taking my daily exercise and worrying me to walk my dog. The visibility to see cars is poor and cars speed across so quickly, it’s just a matter of time until someone is hit.

Resident from I would like to see a cycle lane along the whole length of Tower Hill. It is currently an intimidating stretch of surrounding area road for cyclists.

While I am all in favour of reducing motor traffic and encouraging walking/cycling I have grave doubts as to whether the cost of this scheme will be recouped in any degree (financially/health) by this proposal. The Resident from numbers of pedestrians/cyclists is very unlikely to change to any large degree in the foreseeable future, surrounding area despite best efforts by authorities to encourage this - and despite protestations by cyclists! Walker numbers, I suggest, will remain much as they are.

I would like to see the high street from the butter Cross to Welch way fully and permanently pedestrianised. Resident of Witney This would further improve conditions and usage of the route in this proposal, as well as generally improving the town centre.

Resident of Witney Witney needs a better infrastructure not silly cycle ways

149

build coggs link , like the council were paid to do but chose to delay so sainsburys took the money back witney council are terrible

The scheme for Cornstreet will only really work if Cars do not ignore the priority signs... on a large number of occasions of the last few years whilst cycling back from work in Long Hanbrough I have come up the high street turning into Cornstreet to be greeted with a car driver (and actually Bus driver) Who feel they have right of way, even though the sign posts say otherwise - I am not sure how you will combat this other than to Resident of Witney open that part of the road up more, or make it safer..

Other points - Looking at the plan, I am perplexed that if we are spending the money on improving routes for cycling, Why doesnt Oxfordshire take a leaf out of the Danish way of cycle priority routes? The system works amazingly well, and it is like a proper cycle way (off the street) and segragated from the cars as well... Do this right and could make Oxfordshire an example of how to do it right.

Do not make the same stupid mistakes as Oxford city centre, many people travel to Witney to shop, bringing valuable financial gain to the town. Improve bus services by all means but there are many of us who are of an age where cycling is not feasible, for me living in Marley Park walking into town is not possible. Think about how these changes will affect older people, don’t get carried away with thinking everyone is fit Resident of Witney and able to ride a bike or walk miles. I fear mixing cycles and pedestrians is a recipe for disaster, they should be kept separate, as there are no tests or insurance requirements for cyclists. By all means make it easier to get into town and safer throughout the shopping area, improve bus services to and from town and maybe I would use them.

Sorry, I feel that this survey is totally biased to the Witney Active cycle scheme, it takes into no account of Resident of Witney other road users at all. Happy for a 20pmh all over the town...but.....How many people, pedestrians or cyclists have been injured or killed that need this massive injection of tax payers money to correct??

Resident of Witney Cycle lanes are usually a good thing, the problem is cyclists don’t use them much and they narrow the road area for traffic. For the supposed benefits they are too costly. I’m sure the funds could be put to better use 150

improving the road network for the planned housing developments in Witney

The impact on Corn street will have big effect local business and residents. Has a survey or costs be put in place and considered before this proposal was posted. What evidence is there to say we need more cycle lanes? Resident of Witney To what benefit will this have to the town? Will you introduce resident permit parking? What plans are there to deal with the existing pinch points in town , Bridge street , Witan way? What effect will the proposal have on these current roads and others in the surrounding area? i am sure you would agree any recent survey done in the last year would not be seen to be credible it light if covid

Resident of Witney Please don't do this it will kill witney with taffic that has no where to go. Why can't all transport be help it is not just about walking and cycling. People have drive and things need to be delivered in trucks.

Witney is already gummed with traffic, it needs a good infrastructure away from town centre to deal with traffic before you tamper with town centre routes. Most of Witneys traffic is caused by vehicles having to Business owner transverse the centre to get to the other side. A ring road is the answer to quietening the centre. Most of the traffic in Witney doesn't need to be or doesn't want to be there.

Windrush place new development paths should be put in place so people can bike and walk safely. Crossing Resident of Witney should be out in so people can cross the road safely by deer park. Road speed limit needs to be enforced too many people are speeding passed the people’s home where people walk to windrush place.

One area that is a concern is the proposal to share space on the Tower Hill footpath and make it part cycle lane. The footpath isn't big enough in areas for shared space. It will lead to pedestrians being forced onto Resident of Witney the carriageway in front of traffic to make way for cyclists.

I am very disappointed that the 20mph areas don't include Mill Street and Tower Hill which have both been repeatedly suggested. Speeding is such an issue in both areas - Mill Street has a retirement complex and 151

residents repeatedly express concerns about the speeding traffic. Mill Street also leads to a primary school. The air pollution problems would also be helped by reducing the speed limit. Tower Hill again has a significant speeding problem. There have been numerous close shaves at the pedestrian crossing. This scheme would have been an ideal opportunity to address both issues and cost effective in the long run. Please please reconsider including these areas in the new 20mph zone.

Whilst I support these changes, unfortunately I do not believe they go far enough and are simply a bare minimum change.

Corn Street:

Corn Street has a woefully innefficient and unfair allocation of space, with some parts of the road and pavement unneccessarily wide. I believe a complete redesign of Corn Street is needed rather than simply adding advisory space and paint on the road.

Why, where the road and pavements are at their widest, are cyclists shunned to a ‘advisory’ in-road lane?

A reallocation of space for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles would provide a much better, safer and future proof sollution - rather than spending money for the sake of it on basic changes. Resident of Witney

Stepped cycle tracks along side pedestrian tracks would be preferential, these can then slip on and off the road with buffer zones around parking. This would be possible between Five-Ways Rb to the proposed Bus lane at Holloway Rd.

Has flipping the on-street parking around to bay parking been considered? This seems feasible between Corndell Gardens and Swan Court, either on one side or both. Utilising excess pavement space could facilitate this, creating a much more efficient use of space. Existing trees can act as small buffers between bays where neccessary.

Please also consider double yellow lines opposite on-street parking bays, as double parked cars cause a problem along Corn Street where current pinchpoints occur.

Witan Way Roundabout:

152

As the documents available to review are not detailed plans - what are the plans for providing cyclists the ability to join the carriageway towards town at Langdale Gate from Witan Way?

Again stepped cycle tracks alongside both pavements on Langdale Gate would be preferential and a better link for town center bound cyclists. Or widen the northern pavement between Market Square and Witan Way Rb to facilitate a full length shared path for both directions.

Wherever on-road advisory lanes are being considered, these could really be replaced with a slight extension of pavement width to allow shared space for cyclists and pedestrians. Creating safer cycling environment. Advisory lanes should not be considered as permanent sollutions.

Please also note that basic and regular maintenance needs to be carried out on existing paths. Ducklington Lane being a clear example of being left too long. The pedestrian side of the path is overgrown by turf and hasn’t beed cut back to allow full width.

I also trust that Curbridge Road will see active travel improvements as the addition of Windrush Place will have created increased demand for access to town along this road. Again Curbridge Road has alot of unallocated space and could easily facilitate shared paths oon both sides. This really should have been provided before the building of new estates.

could the cycle path from cogges to the leisure center be properly marked up.Most are unsure what side is Resident of Witney the cycle lane ( better signage please) The route from the church upto cogges is un marked and very dangerous lane marking, give ways signs urgently needed

Given that pedestrians and cyclists will be closely sharing paths, is there a way of persuading cyclists to Resident of Witney keep their speed down?

Resident from I cycle in and around Witney most days and find it mostly quite safe. There is one dodgy place that is not surrounding area mentioned in the proposals. It is the T junction at the corner of Church Green where the one way stretch from the Leys runs parallel to the church and meets the Green. Drivers on the short stretch the runs parallel

153

to the church often do not look right, where cyclists emerge, as they are aware that the one way road should not have motor vehicles on it. I quite regularly have to avoid drivers pulling out, having not looked in my direction, and curiously they can become quite abusive about it! I do not know what the solution is but somehow drivers need to be made aware that cyclists use that one way road.

The Market Square should continue with the current traffic restrictions, I.e. limited access introduced as part of Covid measures. Resident of Witney The proposed 20mph speed limit should cover the whole of the town from entry points on Oxford Hill, West End, Woodstock Road, Burford Road, Curbridge Road and Ducklington Lane for example.

My worry is for blind and deaf people ...... cyclists don't always obey road rules and think crossings don't Resident from apply to them and this means pedestrians can get hurt.....cycles are silent .....again the blind etc won't know surrounding area they are coming

I'd love for you to consider a cycle route from standlake to witney, the roads are so dangerous and scary. I Resident from would love to be able to cycle to witney. I run a campsite in standlake and we get thousands of guests per surrounding area year that would also use a cycle route, it would bring alot more money into witney and be environmentally friendly

Too much money is being spent on cycling to the detriment of car drivers. Most people cycle as a leisure activity not for work or shopping and not in the bad weather. Resident of Witney Car drivers are finding roads made narrower and unrealistic 20 mph speed limits simply make journeys difficult they do not stop people from using their cars because they are a necessary requirement for modern living. Car drivers are once again being made to pay for a minority group who hide behind environmental concerns.

As a pedestrian, I am increasingly concerned with the number of cyclists on narrow paths in and around the Resident of Witney town. I'm all for encouraging people to make more trips by walking or cycling, but unless this issue is resolved, it is increasingly difficult to walk in and around the town. 154

Having unsegregated shared space with cyclists and pedestrians is dangerous, for children and disabled Resident of Witney people

North Witney has been completely ignored - there are no suitable safe routes to walk from New Yatt Road Resident of Witney into town, only narrow pavements, fast moving traffic and no crossings.

I think the council money used to further this scheme should be spent elsewhere, for more pressing things. Unless people are getting run over, there's no reason to make special provision. Cyclists should be competent road riders, where they belong, and pedestrians have pavements at either both sides or one side Resident from of the road. I am in favour of Toucan crossings, but that's it. surrounding area I live in the [redacted] but work and shop in Witney. On a sunny day, I drag my bike out of my car and ride around...no problems at all.

Mill Street, as far as I see has been left out of your calculations, why? This stretch of road needs to have a speed reduction or a one way system put in place. Both the road and path are narrow and completely Resident of Witney unsafe for cyclists. Ambulances at break neck speed us it as shortcut to get to Witney A&E, instead of going through town. Plus, its a rat run for the local school. There has already been one death on the Toucan crossing,we don't want any more.

There should be more education and encouragement to get cyclists away from cycling illegally on the pavements. Suitable lights and helmets should also be encouraged for all cyclists. Resident of Witney If there are more cycle lanes this can only be a good thing and will certainly help long term road safety. There are parts of Witney where I don't feel safe cycling at the moment but the scheme seems to address most issues that I have. Joined up crosstown routes would certainly work for me.

155

I am more than happy for more cycle ways to be implemented but cycles do need to use them as opposed Resident from to the road immediately next to a cycle path. surrounding area Lights and helmets need to be mandatory and enforced and some form of insurance considered

The problem for cyclists on Corn Street are double decker buses. This could be solved by routing them along Witan Way to the roundabout then one way from the Buttercross to Welch Way. Remove the bus stop Resident of Witney by Denshams Butchers and use the one next to Marriotts Walk crossing instead. - A cheaper and more cycle friendly solution.

More 20mph zones are needed. E.g Mill Street and Tower Hill.

Resident of Witney Please ensure that bike racks are have adequate spacing to allow a bike each side then easy access to panniers. I often find that I cannot effectively access my panniers if the racks are full which make life very difficult.

1. Since parking enforcement in Corn Street is generally negligible (and completely non-existent after 17:00) and the existing restrictions are almost universally ignored anyway, the effect at the Buttercross end of the street is to create a bottleneck where cyclists are often obliged to take to the pavements to avoid oncoming vehicles. As long as motorists feel they can park at will on the south side of Corn Street in the section between the two speed-humps, no amount of new road markings and restrictions will make a tangible difference. Resident from 2. The existing traffic island at the west end of Corn Street already makes the turn onto and off the surrounding area roundabout quite tight for large vehicles ─ buses routinely have to either slightly mount the kerb on the nearside, or impinge on the opposite lane on the offside when entering Corn Street from the roundabout. Unless the proposal includes widening the turn in association with enlarging the traffic island, the result will be almost impassable for large vehicles. 3. Based on observation, approximately half the pedestrians crossing the main road by Church Lane do so anywhere but on the pedestrian crossing. Whilst upgrading this to a toucan crossing would undoubtedly be safer ─ the current crossing gives very little opportunity for motorists to stop in good time ─ I wonder

156

whether any higher proportion of pedestrians would walk the extra distance to use it!

If cycling, I would approach the "5 ways roundabout" via the Curbridge road so I would like the scheme to extend westwards to Deer Park Road. This would benefit a large population who live in the central and southern side of Deer Park, the new developments to the west of Deer Park Road and a large part of Thorney Leys."5 ways roundabout" is tricky for cyclists and pedestrians to negotiate safely from and to Curbridge Road and I see nothing in the proposals to resolve this difficulty. Two sets of traffic lights perhaps, but this would cause a build up of vehicles and cyclists would still have these to dodge !! I would definitely cycle more frequently to town and to the Cogges area if this situation can be made safer.

I welcome the proposals to provide lanes and encourage less traffic in Corn Street which would make Resident of Witney cycling safer..

For the sections of cycle and pedestrian paths there needs to be numerous clear signs (say every 50 metres) to show which side is to be used. The existing frequecny of signs is not good enough. Pedestrians typically take up the whole width without taking heed of cyclists and conversely, cycles don't often use bells properly or in good time when passing pedestrians..

How are cyclists travelling east from Church Lane going to safely negotiate the short route to the crossing in Oxford Hill which is against the vehicle flow ?

Resident of Witney Waist of time and money

Resident from Cyclists should be insured and have certified road worthy bikes. Cycling proficiency should be mandatory, surrounding area as a driving license is.

Resident of Witney East West connections are useful but do need extending beyond Tower Hill. Tarmacing the existing bridleway from Tower Hill to Peashell Farm provides a safe cycle and walking route into town from Colwell 157

Green and Windrush Place. This is urgently needed to provide a much shorter route.

At the other end it is noted that their will be improvements to the route from Newland to Woodgreen School and this route should also be tarmaced.

Other existing cycle routes need to connect with this cross town service. At present there are a large number of small separate cycle routes. The intention to provide signage is welcomed.

Five Ways Roundabout is increasingly difficult for pedestrians to cross and toucan or pelican crossings are needed at all junctions. It is not a point at which cycling should be encouraged at present.

I have no choice but to use a car for all my journeys, however short. I cannot cycle or walk due to disability. By making car journeys more difficult, you will hamper my everyday life and make me feel even more Resident of Witney isolated. Please don’t reduce the width of the carriageway - its already difficult to navigate Corn Street with the ridiculous narrowed areas towards the Buttercross, and High Street is also dangerous at present by forcing permitted drivers to drive in the wrong side of the road into incoming traffic.

I will be more sympathetic towards cycling when cyclists are more responsible and stop riding on Resident of Witney pavements, running red lights, helmets made compulsory and more policing and fines

I am opposed because any road scheme that slows down traffic as it does so at the expense of economic activity and will harm local businesses. If faced with a slower more arduous journey people will turn to the internet and more polluting diesel vans will fill Witney. Sustainability will only come through the adoption of electric vehicles as they become more technically and financially viable until then we ought wait. and not spend any more money that could be better spent elsewhere such as the regeneration of shopping areas. Resident of Witney All of the new estates built around Witney will be used by people with cars, not cyclists. What this scheme will say to them , is that they are not welcome in the centre of Witney with the result their spending will be made elsewhere, not in the businesses of our town that desperately need our support.

This scheme, and others like it, are not driven by the needs of the towns people as a whole but by the vociferous cycling lobby, sadly supported by our PM, that exist for the benefit of themselves.

158

I might add that the roads would be safer for everybody if bikes were totally banned from roads and pavements, safer for the biker, safer for pedestrians and safer for car drivers especially when making a bigger distance between them risk hitting on coming cars.

Resident of Witney I would like to think that old and new cycle ways be kept clear not like now where a lot are over grown

Resident from The reason people don't cylce very much is the lack of cylce lanes traffic is busy which off putting and scary surrounding area when space is limited Coverd Parking for bicycles

I would like the cycle path through Cogges to join onto the rest of the cycle network. Resident of Witney I am glad to see cycling provision through Langdale Gate as the current route through Cogges just stops at the pelican crossing

With regard to the cycle path on Church Lane between Cogges Farm and Witan. This path is used by a high number of pedestrians and cyclists every day. I also use this path everyday for exercise and take my 1 year old son as well.

Everyday I see cyclists speeding down this path with little consideration for the pedestrians who are also using the path and road. That’s not to say that all cyclists do this but there is a high number that don’t realise that they need to adjust their speed because of the proximity of pedestrians.

Resident of Witney My suggestion is to extend the cycle path to the end of junction adjacent to Cogges Barn and to put some warning signs/ speed cooling measure so cyclists slow down. You may also wish to consider placing a couple of speed bumps along the cycle path, you may wish to make cyclists dismount on the bridge, which would also slow them down.

One other concern is that during the lockdown you are effectively making pedestrians unable to keep 2 metres apart because they are crammed on to half of the pavement worried in case a cyclist comes up behind them.

159

It is only a matter of time before there is a serious accident on that path where a cyclist hits a small child or someone who is elderly who hasn’t the ability to react quickly enough.

As for the extension of the cycling lane, everyday people use this path with young children and cyclists still feel they can travel at speed. My advice is divert them up the hill or widen the path.

The scheme doesn't include any improvements for West Witney which is disappointing. Resident of Witney

Please take into account that many of the people who might benefit from this scheme would be children, Resident of Witney older people who don't drive cars or use mobility scooters. These groups will have been less likely to access or complete this survey

Path ways must be widen enough to cope, Langel from Old youth club is fair to narrow for shared spaces, Resident of Witney cyclist should give way & no please no line across bridges again Cyclist should give way or ride dead slow

The only reason I said "negative impact" for the Holloway Road through-road closure is related to parking; it's one of the main parking options for Corn Street residents up around that area, so I imagine it would be Resident of Witney inconvenient to have to enter it from the bottom every time. That's still a better outcome than it becoming a major cut through (in the event of an eastbound bus lane), so I'm not proposing that it remain completely open!

The shared pedestrian and cycle path across Langel common is dangerous because it is not delineated enough especially over the two bridges where children run from side to side and cyclists go too fast and most cyclists don't use bells these days. The bridges need replacing with wider bridges clearly keeping Resident of Witney cyclists and pedestrians apart. There seems to be too much emphasis on increasing lighting. This is not environmentally friendly and should if deemed necessary be of the type that only comes on when movement is detected.

160

These will offer no benefits for the town centre, the council need to focus on road safety in west end . Resident of Witney Residents suffer from the race track of drivers large hub vehicles that thunder up an down this old street.

I welcome any improvements to cycling provision especially having young children who regularly travel around Witney by bike.

I do however think the plans lack ambition. Little/no segregation. Dismounts required to cross main routes. Resident of Witney Motorists seem to take priority in this town.

The council needs much more ambition on active travel. For example, the whole town could become one way. Freeing up whole lanes for cyclists.

I, like your own cycling champion, am giving up hope of active travel ever being taken seriously in this area.

There will be more cyclists using Church Lane which has a section with residential parking. Currently there is not enough width for two cars to pass. I am concerned about the safety of cyclists which are frequently in conflict with vehicles on this section. Some drivers drive too fast along this section. There is a problem with Resident of Witney visibility when turning out of Meadow View often obscured by proximity of parked vehicles. I suggest introducing a 20mph speed limit and some double yellow lines by the entrance to Meadow View. Also is there a possibility of removing some hedging to widen the footpath? There is already a footpath on the other side of the hedging. So is there is a possibility of combining this into a wider unsegregated shared use path?

Resident of Church Lane. Worried about damage to residents property including cars parked on road with Resident of Witney an increase in footfall on the road. Both Cyclists and motorists often damage cars on the lane by driving recklessly. Should be residents only parking street. Roads need patching.

Cycle lanes must be well defined with penalties for cycling in non-designated areas such as pavements. Resident of Witney Although cycling on the pavement is currently illegal in Britain, many adults indulge in this dangerous breach of the law. Cycling is a wonderful mode of transport when individuals are responsible and courteous.

161

I would like details of how the changes of access to Corn Street will affect residents who live at the Holloway Resident of Witney to Five Ways roundabout. Will you now introduce a resident's parking permit in order to ensure that non- residents do not park at that end when they are shopping etc?

No problem with most of the proposals but do think the Corn St/Holloway Rd proposals will be the most controversial. From my personal viewpoint it would not be too bad although driving around at night looking for a roadside parking space so I could go to Fat Lils or one of the pubs in Corn St would be a pain if one- way! I think those businesses are likely to suffer and this would be a shame as it is one of the few roads in Resident from Witney with a bit of life at night and some good places to eat as well. It is less likely that I would want to walk surrounding area a long way from one of the car parks at night (especially if dressed up for a night out!) and would not feel so safe having to walk a longer way at night either afterwards. I have some sympathy with not wanting Holloway Rd to turn into a rat run as there are quite a few elderly residents. No chance of moving the bus station out to one of the trading estates and making that a car park, I suppose?!

The proposals for the so called 5 ways roundabout are totally inappropriate. ALL road crossings should have visual AND audio instruction. If existing pathways were to be cleared back to expose the existing tarmac Resident of Witney pathways would be instantly wider, ie Ducklinton lane. The existing high street measures to keep most traffic away from Tthe High Street appear to be adequate. Green policies aside , pedestrians and bus users should be considered over cyclists

Resident of Witney More cycle paths! Especially creating safe ways to navigate bigger more dangerous roundabouts.

Just a short note around improving pavements and cycle lanes between Windrush Place (Curbridge) and Resident of Witney the City Centre. Currently there are no cycle lanes or full pathways between Curbridge Road > Thorney Leys Road > Station Lane. It is currently not safe to take children out on their bikes or walk into town from Windrush Place.

Resident of Witney Cyclists are one of the biggest inconvenience to motorists and are also highly responsible for a lot of accidents due to holding traffic up! We aren’t living in the Stone Age anymore we are in the 21st century and 162

roads these days are for vehicles to travel on and it’s about time things reflected this! I personally think cyclists are too much of a hazard to traffic and should only be allowed to ride off-road never should they be on main roads and in town centres!

Resident of Witney Will more cycle racks be provided at select points along the route and in the town centre?

On entering Corn Street from The Crofts and going to the Civic Centre or Sainsburys or shops on Station Lane when not able to walk, I will have to drive down to the Five ways roundabout and then along Welch Road and back behind Waitrose (assuming that I cannot travel towards Market Square along High Street) probably along Witan Way. I suspect the plan will add considerably to the already busy junction between Resident of Witney Welch Way and the High Street and a right turn off the High Street on to Witan Way. It seems that considerable expense is being incurred to accommodate cyclists who do not contribute to the road fund licence. Furthermore, what steps are being made to ensure that bicycles are road worthy? I do strongly support cycling, but only if the bicycles are safe, the cyclists are considerate and that cycle paths are well separated from pedestrians.

Re Madely Park paths to Oxford Hill, need to be paved so they are accessible in bad weather and less Resident of Witney uneven for older walkers. Better lit too. This is a great way from the estate to Oxford Hill and into town that I use whenever it's passable, just needs improving

I agree with cycling and walking more, but safety of pedestrians must be taken into account. I have come very close to being hit by cyclists on pavements and shared routes in Witney a number of times. Pavements Resident of Witney must be wide enough for two people to walk without a cycle or motorised scooter being too close. Shared paths are not ideal as cycles and scooters move quickly and pedestrians are more likely to be injured if hit. Also parking on the pavements in Witney and on yellow lines need to be dealt with before sharing pavements with cycles as well as parked cars! I think that you should go further. I think that the High Street could be pedestrianised completely and Resident of Witney permenantly.

Resident of Witney leave things as they are

163

I have a major concern about access from Corn Street to Marlborough lane, which provides access to my parking through The Old Coach House. Lorries and vans use the lane to make deliveries to residents and businesses and also to remove waste bins. Just providing west bound access only from corn street into Marlborough lane will create traffic jams because vehicles turning into the lane will have to wait for those Resident of Witney vehicles already in the lane to exit. Currently the two way traffic in corn street gives drivers options to exit and enter from either direction which speeds up the whole process of using the lane. I recommend that someone monitors the level of traffic using Marlborough lane currently to appreciate the sheer volume of traffic that has to access a very narrow cul de sac on a daily basis.

How will you stop The Crofts/Saxon Way/Orchard Way being used as a rat-run by those cars who enter Corn Street from the Five Ways roundabout, then realising they can't enter the 'bus lane' section at Holloway Road and The Crofts? They won't be able to turn around there and with Holloway Road closed, they will be forced into a cut through/rat-run via The Crofts, Saxon Way and Orchard Way.

I'm pleased parking bays will be reviewed at the lower end of Corn Street too. It is exceptionally difficult to safely exit Swinburn Place on to Corn Street when cars are parked - even when they're parked legally in the Resident of Witney designated bays - as they impair vision along the road.

Finally, I would like more clarity about how the new rules will be enforced. I appreciate this may be down to WODC rather than OCC though I'm sure you are working on this effort together. The traffic enforcement officers rarely patrol between Holloway Road and the Five Ways Roundabout. Furthermore, parking at the Market Square end of Corn Street (westbound) is full in the evenings with takeaway parking. Restrictions are not enforced there either. So what's to disincentivise people wishing to take advantage? Thank you!

As a resident of Applegarth Court I feel the blocking of Holloway Road will be exceptionally detrimental to Resident of Witney me and my neighbours. I am in favour of speed reduction measures on Holloway Road, but what is suggested will not work in practice,

164

I have lived on Tower Hill for many years and do not believe the scheme will work without some changes. The Sustrans route runs behind my house.

I assume, for the purposes of the following comments, that the widening of the Eastern path (you call it Northern) will not involve knocking down walls to provide more room or by using part of the verge on the Cemetery side.

My thoughts with respect to Tower Hill are:

1. Today I watched a large articulated FloGas Tanker go down the hill. It took up all the width of onelane. Another large lorry turned the corner below the Traffic Lights with its rear wheels over the white lines. These are just two of many instances involving large vehicles. To make the current scheme viable you will need to ban such large vehicles. 2. Very few people use the Sustrans route for cycling: 2.a Touring cyclists have occasionally stopped at the Traffic Lights opened maps and looked puzzled about Resident of Witney the signage and path. A few have used the route most carry on up the hill. 2.b Most fitness cyclist do not use the Sustrans route even along the Burford road. 2.c The bridleway is very narrow and has an awkward barrier and dog-leg near Smiths Estate. This has led to near misses with cyclists. I usually avoid the path as it is impossible to keep 2m separation. 2.d Parents with young children on scooters or bikes are often heard screaming at the children to stop before they get to the Traffic Lights. There have been instances of children not stopping and just shooting out into the road. 3. A general observation is that very few Henry box pupils use a push bike. This was also true pre COVID. A cycle lane may help a little with uptake. It would however probably be better to route them via The Crofts. 4. A reason given for the scheme is so that staff can get to work on the industrial estates. To get to the Range Road cyclists will use the cycleway though Smiths Estate and Deer Park; the shortest route. This narrow route goes past the Deer Park School which can be heavily congested with pupils and parents. 5. When walking on the lower part of the hill it is difficult to maintain 2m separation, often requiring excursions into the road. If a cycle track is implemented then you should expect similar excursions, whether legal or not. 6. Is two-way cycling on the proposed route really practical? 7. I would object if a Toucan Crossing is any noisier than the current crossing.

165

Proposed changes at the roundabout to facilitate cycles crossing Welch Way:

1. For walkers crossing at that point is currently difficult, mainly due to vehicles travelling too fast on the roundabout and failure to use their indicators. I suggest that the proposed 20 mph speed limit should apply to the nearest parts of Ducklington Lane, Curbridge Road and Tower Hill which may(?) help. Is Welch Way to also be 20mph?

Corn street changes:

1. Making the road form Market Square to Holloway Road a one way removes one of the four routes to town. During lockdowns this should not be a problem, but afterwards I am concerned about increased congestion. Bridge Street is often very congested causing tail backs to Welch Way. Station Lane can be equally congested. Closing the Corn Street will route traffic from Curbridge Road, Tower Hill and from Ducklington Lane down Welch Way. I do not see how the junction with High Street will cope. Access to the Hospital, Heath Centres the Fire and Police Station may be compromised.

2. Access for deliveries will have to be from the Town Centre, adding to congestion on the available routes. On reopening High Street I assume Lorries will use that route into Corn Street. 3. To implement this scheme you really need to reduce the post lockdown traffic through the town i.e. Shores Green!

Finally I must comment on the every short consultation period for this scheme. It may be the case that current Planning Rules do not apply but this scheme can have a major impact on the community, who have the right to be heard.

There is no information provided re KSIs or speed surveys, so there can be no 'measure' of improvements to safety. Resident from What level of enforcement of the proposed 20mph speed limits have been agreed with TVP? surrounding area I may have missed the answer, but are the 20mph proposals for a 'Zone' or street by street limits?

All answers re travel usage are for non-lockdown restriction times. The questions do not make clear answers should be for 'normal' times, so I make that assumption. Others may not....

166

Representative from a The 3 Cross sections, A, B, C, shown on map 2/4 appear to show road and footpath width availablity that group or organisation doesn't seem actually available in some sections. Notably Tower Hill & eastern end of Corn Street.

Difficult to get bike safely from the cycle path adjacent to the leisure centre onto the Langdale Gate Resident of Witney roundabout. You either have to cycle over the road and cycle down the pavement or join the road more or less on the actual roundabout.

However, I do have several concerns about parking, the number of spaces that will be available and accessing these areas. From your proposal it is not totally clear to me as to whether or not the 2 hour spaces will still be available on the north side of Corn Street between Holloway Road and Swan Court. I often use these spaces when unloading shopping and parking my car there after 6pm. If there are no spaces available I then have to park in Holloway Road. This is not always ideal as I have frequently been met with verbal abuse, vandalism (reported to the police) and had notes put on my car for parking outside peoples houses (obviously I am parked in a valid space). With the possible reduction of parking spaces around the Resident of Witney area and the difficulty in accessing these spaces I feel that feelings with residents in Holloway Road will run high if the residents of Corn Street parking in 'their' road spaces. I have on many an occasion had to park my car in Swingburn Place/The Crofts; this adds additional journey time, is difficult if I am carrying things and I am uncomfortable leaving my car so far away from home given the issues there have been with parking in Holloway Road. Is it therefore not possible to introduce a residents (Corn Street) parking permit which would exclude Corn Street residents from the 2 hours restriction? This I think would solve a lot of the parking issues for us.

I would be interested to receive your feedback on this matter.

I'd prefer the use of segregated on road cycle path where possible rather than shared use path which tends Resident of Witney to lead to a little confusion regarding right of way - I'd also like to understand what provision has been made in the standard budget for the maintenance including regular sweeping of these facilities as that's the reason why I don't use them as a cyclist currently. 167

The map is also somewhat unclear - is a toucan crossing proposed on Tower Hill to connect cyclists and pedestrians to the existing Sustrans route 57? If not how do you propose cyclists and pedestrians cross the road at that point where the visibility up Tower Hill is very short due to the brow of the hill? Also has consideration been given to making the eastern end of Corn Street no access other than buses and cycling (& deliveries) rather than one way? - I'm sure this would greatly further reduce the capacity and use of motor vehicles making the scheme more attractive to people for active travel / cutting pollution etc. Are there any plans to introduce changes to the parking facilities / restrictions on Corn Street as part of the plan - could any be added e.g. Designated electric vehicle only bays with charging infrastructure, residents parking scheme, different parking restriction lengths of stay depending on location etc?

East to West

Crucial to the success of the scheme at the eastern end will be the surfacing and upgrading of the path from Park View Court to Woodbank, and Woodbank to Wood Green School entrance. These will enable active travel in high volumes for two groups: residents coming to and from the large Madley Park development and beyond (e.g. North Leigh, Long Hanborough); and pupils and staff at Wood Green School. Lighting needs to be introduced, as well as a proper surface and drainage ditches (already there but need clearing and proper construction). These alone will boost walking and cycling.

Measures along these stretches and over Langel Common need to make clear it is a shared space, and reduce incidents where walkers, dogs, prams and cycles impede each other - I am sure there are ways this Resident of Witney can be done without expensive signage. Urgent work is needed to mend the bridges over Langel.

Care needs to be taken to facilitate onward journeys into town from the east, with amendments to crossings and warnings to road users that pedestrians and cyclists have a higher priority than at present. This might include improvements to the light phasing at the crossing by Waitrose, surface colouring or treatment, raised bed crossing, a new shelter or island on Witan Way between the path and Langdale Gate with a distinct surface, and thought given to the restrictive barriers as emerging from the woods and entering Waitrose car park (removing them or improving line of sight for all users as cyclists and walkers emerge). All are low-cost solutions.

A clearly signed path for cyclists emerging off Langel Common and into Langdale Gate is needed to allow smooth onward journeys by bike.

168

The measures to prioritise active travel along Corn Street are very important and signage will need care. If the High Street is opened to all car traffic again (and I hope it isn't) then the scheme will need to be reviewed first and monitored afterwards. A no stopping rule for the narrow part of Corn Street during peak hours is crucial and should be enforced rigorously. The build outs have got to go I think to let cycles through, and wider pavements would help pedestrians.

The closure of Holloway Road as a through route is interesting, but residents might have views about where exactly the closure should be to allow best access to their homes on desired routes, by car.

Corn Street residents have long hoped for on-street parking. Nose-in parking would increase capacity and reduce the width of the roadway, but may not be practical. Cyclists should be strongly incentivised to use the cycle lanes - and is there a way to make them less "advisory"? Pavements are currently used routinely, at the peril of pedestrians.

The improvements at Five Ways are very welcome, but will require close consultation with cycling groups in particular.

SCHEME IGNORES THE NEEDS AND POTENTIALLY WORSENS THE EFFECTS ON DISABLED AND BLUE BADGE HOLDERS WHO CANNOT CYCLE OR INDEED WALK VERY FAR. IT MUST NOT Resident of Witney DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEM IN FAVOUR OF THE CURRENT TREND TO ENCOURAGE CYCLING AND WALKING WHICH IN ITSELF IS GOOD BUT MUST NOT BE DONE AT THE EXPENSE OF NEEDY AND SOMETIMES VERY ILL PEOPLE.

This may be covered in another stage but when the cycle path from Hailey Road to town is flooded there are no measures in place to help the cyclists from the Hailey Road end access town. This includes negotiating to dangerous roundabouts and narrow pavements if walking.

Resident of Witney I appreciate there is a ongoing issue with the bridge at bridge street as the road cannot be widen here and varios places were a cycle path would greatly increase congestion.

However, the pre-existing cycle path across what was Early Mill Fields, could be raised substantially, lighting added, and measures take to allow water to pass beneath.

169

This would serve 1000's more residents of witney, more if the North Witney development goes ahead.

Tower Hill: I would prefer to see a segregated cycle lane rather than shared use which tend to be chaotic Corn Street: absolutely in favour of one way (excepting buses & cycles) as the current "chicane" is dangerous on a bike but I think a review of double yellow & no loading lines will be required otherwise you Resident of Witney will still find legitimate blue badge users and illegitimate delivery drivers will stop there and interrupt the planned flow. Also review on street parking where the road widens as it's all very well there being a buffer to help cyclists avoid car doors but it doesn't always work in practice Oxford Hill to Madley Park: this needs to have a proper hard surface and actual lighting

Your making it very difficult for residents to get around easily and get out of Witney and you would just great Resident of Witney more traffic like you did at Oxford. Which is true as I travelled before and after you did Oxford and you made it worse.

Resident of Witney I will not cycle. I have not cycled for more than 50 years. My wife suffers from dementia, she will not cycle. We walk, but only when going for a meal, coffee or a small shop in reasonable weather.

Nothing whatsoever for Deer Park/Curbridge side of Witney. We do not already have a safe way to get into the centre of town. Absolutely disgraceful you are not representing us. You can already safely cycle from Madley Park and Cogges to Waitrose and from West End over the river to M&S (when not flooded). No Resident of Witney cycle way for us apart from a perimeter one - as Madley Park has! I do not want to share a path with pedestrians unless it is clearly halved and marked as such otherwise you have to keep getting off and then it’ll be back cycling on the road.... I wonder how many making these decisions actually ride a bike at all; if you did you’d fix the holes along Welch way by the fire and police station etc etc. Get on your bike around the town and at least make it as safe as it could be now - that would be a very good start.

Resident of Witney This is another example of using the Covid Pandemic to put through silly schemes led by the "I hate car" brigade.

Resident of Witney 1. Five ways Rbt - should be reduced to single line for traffic. No provision for cyclists from Curbridge Rd. Toucan crossings are a waste of money. 170

2 & 3. Shared paths walkers/cyclists is always difficult as neither keep to allocated lane. 4. 5. Surely more than 20mph is difficult around Market square. mandatory 20mph everywhere within town centre. 6. STOP all cars parking outside Landale Gate. Double yellow lines are in places for a reason and that should include everyone. There are disabled parking places in Waitrose CP which are no further from the shops than where they currently park outside LG. 7. Off road shared facility cause friction between the types of users. 8. This is very narrow in places. Apart from a white line on the path there is no indication of who goes where. The walk/cycle path signs are disregarded. What about dog walkers who insist on having a dog on a long lead across all the path? Once past the vicarage there isn't even a white line to "segregate" walkers and cyclists. It is dangerous. 9. 20mph would be good but it would also help if pedestrians kept to the pavement (problem before COVID) 10. Toucan crossings offer no benefit. 11 & 12. The path from Ox Hill to Court Gdns is very narrow up to the bridge. Can't the path nearer to Kingsfiled Crescent be inproved and used. It is much wider. 13. As long as cyclists and walkers are segregated. 14. 15. 16. 20mph.

Why is the cycle lane stopping halfway up Tower Hill. No cyclists wants to stop half way up a hill. The path through to Smiths estate alongside the cemetery is not a good cycle route. Prohibiting disabled parking in Langdale Gate would improve cycling safety. There is no possible reason why a disabled person should park there instead of the nearby car parks. The proposed cycle route from the crossing on Oxford Hill Resident of Witney alongside WoodGreen School would be better if it went straight up alongside Madeley Brook by the old sports hut, instead of the wiggly narrow path which crosses a bridge alongside Court Gardens. Upgrading crossings to Pelican crossings are a waste of money ,as cyclists are usually intelligent enough to know when it’s safe to cross. If it’s safe for a pedestrian it’s safe for a cyclist. Painting cycles on roads in various parts of Witney was a complete waste of time and money . As a cyclist I don’t know what they meant I’m sure drivers didn’t either. Remarking and painting signs on the cycle route across Langdale Common

171

would have been much more useful. The cycle route to the Leys alongside the church also needs to be clearer.

Provide a 20 mile ph speed limit in Mill Street Resident of Witney All Residents of Riverside Gardens are elderly and road crossing and walking on exceptionaly narrow footpaths is increasingly hazardous

Please consider the inclusion of Mill Street in the new 20mph zone up to the Woodford Way junction. Resident of Witney Vehicles often travel along this stretch of road at well over the current 30mph limit. It would certainly make the road safer, quieter, make accessing Woodford Mill and Riverside Gardens easier and help address the poor air quality which is already harming people's health and damaging old and historic buildings. Unfortunately the structure of this questionnaire introduces some bias: While "increased cycling" is theoretically a laudable aim, its simplistic roll-out will not meet a number of un/anticipated objectives: - this scheme is very unlikely to encourage any of the multi-car households in Madley Park, Cogges, etc to sell any car ... - cycling will not substitute for heavy weekly shopping trips, for many school runs", etc. - especially in wet/ colder/ darker weather - failure to provide a predominantly SEGREGATED cycleway is likely to cause an increase in the existing problems caused by frequent aggressive cycling: with people being hit, clothes & shopping bags being torn, etc etc. - for all of which there is no recording mechanism, any means of claiming against the culprit-cyclist, Resident of Witney or ... Aggressive pavement "two-wheeling" against pedestrians is an increasingly universal danger (sadly)

More practical safety & regulation measures ned to be incorporated throughout these current proposals, especially where there are obvious pinch-point issues. For example: - safety protection for people on the Windrush bridges (feeding water fowl, playing pooh-sticks, ....) where cyclists frequently cycle AT them, often at speeds in excess of 10mph - speed-reduction measures throughout, such as barriered chicanes which can't be got-around, dismantled with ring-spanner sets, etc - clear signing of both non- and cycling zones, routes, ... and regular allocations of publicised enforcement to improve "behaviours" etc. 172

The data-sets used to underpin the design and costing of these proposals must be published now: thus allowing clear and explicit comparison of "actuals" against published future outcomes, actual out-turn costs, etc

Speed limit innMill St should be reduced. Residents , in particular those in Riverside Gdns have great Resident of Witney difficulty in crossing the road.

Witney has always been a thriving market town precisely because traffic has been free to move around the town , these proposed changes will alter the character of the town centre and will deter small businesses Business owner from choosing Witney as a suitable town to locate to . It will in short make running a business in Corn Street harder and you will find businesses will close as a result . Many of us rely on ease of parking , number of parking spaces , delivery vehicles etc . Please do not destroy Witney in the same way other town centres have been destroyed in Oxfordshire .

While it is progress in the right direction for those on the axis of the route it doesn't help many others. The location of the towns schools don't appear to have been taken into consideration.

Woodstock Road, New Yatt, Bridge Street and West End are all congestion points and two have schools on them. There are no cycling provisions for this area and pedestrian access is difficult as there is no crossing Resident of Witney point at the double roundabout where Bridge Street meets West End.

The 20mph zone should be extended to the whole of the town centre and roads with schools. Why just focus on certain roads and areas?

The proposal all seems quite arbitrary with no explanation of why you've chosen this route and speed zones, and not others.

It would have been nice to have been able to put your whole postcode OX28 6PE in so that you can Resident of Witney understand how we feel about this new scheme. The residents of Applegarth Court, which is a Private Road are not at all happy with the closure of Holloway Rd. 173

And we all want to protest against it. We feel it's going to be Chaos at our end, with Lorry's, Car's, Fire Engines, Delivery Vans all trying too turn around to go back down Holloway Rd to Welch Way. There are 16 free parking bays + 2 Disabled bays that are full everyday on oneside of Holloway Rd. We have all lived here for just over 1.5 years, & this change was never mentioned. Ever since we have been here, it has been a nightmare going down Holloway to Welch Way, because of the parked up cars. You play dodgems all the way down & up & some of the abuse from other cars if you don't let them go first is shocking. We are hoping to have a Site visit by Odele Parsons, so that we can walk through Holloway, to show her first hand how this will impact our lives. We do all won't to stay positive, and the idea of new cycle routes is fab. But Not at the expense of residence who pay a lot of Council Tax to live in Applegarth Court. I went to the Fire Station on Welch Way this week, to ask what the Traffic on Welch Way was like before Covid-19. They said that most days at certain times of the day was chaos. What hope do we have when Holloway Rd & US residence, which could amount to an extra 85 cars, plus the college student cars, all try to wait their turn on Welch Way to get Into Holloway Rd. Plus all the extra cars from Corn St homes, because the other end of Corn St is closed off to them. And by the way, l don't think I've ever seen a cyclist on Holloway Rd.

This questionnaire is skewed towards acceptance of the plans. I believe you are looking to solve a problem Resident of Witney that isn't there. There is no evidence shown for the necessity of a route from Tower Hill to Madley Park. This is an obscene waste of public money.

Please be aware of the danger of car doors opening and hitting cyclists, especially on Corn Street. We need to be able to cycle at least a full car's door width from any parked cars. If you keep the chicanes in Corn Street, it would be good to enforce the parking restrictions more than is Resident of Witney currently the case. Similarly, with 20mph limits. I am in favour but they are often ignored by many motorists, so if we are going to have them, I would hope that they would be enforced. There is a lack of suitable cycle parking currently, especially as you go further down High Street. You need to be able to lock your bike but you don't want to cause a nuisance by obstructing the pavement.

1. The feedback hasn't given me adequate opportunities to explain my concerns. Resident of Witney 2. Removing eastbound car traffic in Corn Street will lead to increased traffic levels in Welch Way and the northern section of the High Street - the option to use Corn Street and Langdale Gate to Witan Way would no longer be available. 174

3. Get rid of the build outs on Corn Street; these are the most frequent cause of congestion and conflict. A 20mph limit along the entire length would be reasonable though. The proposed zebra crossing should be a Pelican crossing, 4. Where are your traffic modelling figures? These MUST be provided before the scheme goes any further. 5. I support a Toucan crossing upgrade on Oxford Hill; it's what I suggested instead of the humped crossing in July 2015.

Finally, most of the transport choices are currently irrelevant due to COVID-19 restrictions; my responses are made on the assumption that normal life will return - and that the current closure of the High Street will be terminated.

Why are your comment boxes restricted to 250 Characters? If this were a proper consultation and not just a rubber stamping exercise you would be accepting consultations as long as people needed. Closing Holloway Road will impede both Fire Engines and Ambulances accessing housing on the other side of Corn Street in an emergency. Closing Holloway Road will make it impossible for District Council waste trucks to collect from homes as there will be nowhere for them to turn around and they will have to reverse the entire length of the road to get back out. I am not against improving cycle and pedestrian access but with all the problems that businesses are experiencing with Covid 19 and the Lockdown the last thing any of them need Business owners at this time is the disruption to the town centre that your plans will bring. These measures will not help to improve the air quality particularly in the AQMA whereas changing ICE vehicles to Electric Vehicles will have a far greater impact. Like so many in our increasingly ageing constituency I suffer with arthritis and having good access by car to the town centre and outer areas is of paramount importance. If my carriers cannot access my loading bay easily this will restrict my trade. The same is true for the off street parking for Company Vehicles, staff and customers who currently access the parking area from the Corn Street end of Holloway Road. It cannot be right to restrict the access people will have to their own homes and car parking in order to favour one section of society over another.

Firstly the emaill address in your letter does NOT WORK!!!!! I set out below the text of the email I wanted to send to you: Resident of Witney

Good afternoon

175

I live on The Crofts which is off Corn Street and would like to comment about the proposals for Corn Street.

The Crofts leads to The Springs and Weavers Close where I would guess there are in total some 400 dwellings.

Whilst cars could exit onto Corn Street via Saxon Way and Orchard Way it is my belief that this is not at all common.

That means that these cars reach Corn Street at the junction with Holloway Road. If these 'measures' are implemented the only way to leave Witney is to turn left onto Corn Street and go down to the Five ways roundabout. This means that for those wishing to travel to Waitrose or Woodstock or Charlbury or the villages on the way or close by there will be extra pollution from an increase in their travel through town.

I question whether the benefits from the 'measures' will outweigh the extra pollution from the extra town driving.

You should close Holloway Road for through motor traffic half way up otherwise you will create a hopeless dead end at the Holloway Road/Corn Street. Cyclists already use pavements in Witney not roads. Our Resident of Witney refuse collection will suffer at Applegarth Court as will courier deliveries. Older residents rely more on cars/taxis and will be at a disadvantage.

You should close Holloway Road to through motor traffic half way up. A simple barrier with an opening gate for emergency vehicles. Cheap solution and avoids a rat run. Otherwise you will create a hopeless dead end Resident of Witney at the Holloway Road / Corn Street Junction. Dustbin lorry access to Applegarth Court will be prevented. A lot of Councils are having to dig these schemes up, where they have been badly thought out, as is this

176

scheme.

Why close Corn St in one direction - all you end up doing is creating a bottleneck elsewhere.

Resident of Witney The pavements are already too narrow esp between market square and Holloway Road.

Why can’t the buses be rerouted.

If a 20 mph speed limit is imposed will this also imposed on cycles? Can this be properly regulated? Resident of Witney If a cycle lane / path / way is provided, will cycles be prosecuted if they refuse to use and use the road instead ?

What a load of bollocks. Ban busses from Corn Street (eastern end), if you are serious about cyclist & pedestrian safety. The Corn St./High St. junction is just not suited to large vehicles turning & there is no good reason why busses can't use Landale/Witan Way/Station Lane or do a u-turn back down the High Street. Why do you think cyclists want to share Corn St. with busses, but not cars?

If you build more cycle paths, will you put money aside to maintain them? The existing paths in Witney are an utter disgrace - with subsidence, flooding, potholes & many vegetative obstructions. Complaints on 'fixmystreet' are usually ignored. Some paths are now only half the width they were originally built. Resident of Witney Why is there no proposal for the Curbridge &/or Thorney Leys Roads? - many more people live off the Curbridge Rd, than Tower Hill & more homes are being built.

Cycle/footpaths from the Curbridge road roundabout to Ducklington Lane crossroads would cater to residents visiting Burwell Recreation Ground, The Leys & Sainsbury's. I'm sure most Deer Park residents would rather cycle into town & back via the gentle slope of Thorney Leys, rather than bust a gut trying to get up Tower Hill with bags full of shopping. Curbridge road would be another alternative with a less intimidating ascent, and there is scope to easily widen the paths there. Burford Rd residents already have the choice of Woodford Way, Puck Lane & Moor 177

Avenue, all of which are fairly safe routes into town.

The recently built shared path on the Ducklington Lane crossroads (by the pumping station) presents a considerable danger to both pedestrians & cyclist, being both narrow & a blind 90 degree bend. Will you be correcting that flaw?

The path to Ducklington is overgrown by Beechgate & a confusing muddle of highway & footpath heading south with a precarious crossing over the A40 (eastbound) slip road for both pedestrians & cyclists. Further along, there is nothing to prevent a fall into Colwell Brook. Once again, these are recent OCC schemes which failed to deliver safety for pedestrians & cyclists.

Will you also be widening the shared path between Ducklington Lane (Premier Inn) & The Leys, clearing it of overgrowth, pollarding the willows & cleaning the ditches?

Will the existing Windrush crossings & paths be widened? Will there be some segregation of traffic & pedestrians by The Priory - this can be very busy at school times. A path alongside the church car park or widening the path adjacent to Cogges Farm Museum & that tricky blind bend?

Resident of Witney The questions are leading for people to agree with these ridiculous plans.

All improvements are to be welcomed but these changes are quite limited in terms of encouraging people to cycle more. I live 5 miles from Witney and I have cycled there but the roads are so dangerous I am not encouraged to do so regularly. Only when we have safe, separated cycle paths across the area will people Resident from be encouraged to cycle more. There is quite frankly no reason for cars to drive through the centre of witney, surrounding area as the recent road closure of the high street has proved.

Keep up the good work but be more ambitious. And please don't waste any money on silly pictures painted on the roads.

Resident from As a resident of West Witney I think the plan has shortcomings in Tower Hill and Five Ways roundabout. I surrounding area also cannot see any improvments unless the brideway along the cemetry is upgraded considerably as it is 178

narrow, over-grown and has barriers obstructing it.

Shared spaces seem to work better in theory than in practice with the poor pedestrian appearing to be at greater risk in some schemes. Cyclists abandoning cycle lanes and defaulting to roadways because they are ‘entitled’ to use the road. The proposals seem fine and are progressive. OCC need to learn from current local schemes, which can become crowded and so hazardous - across Langel Common for example. As you are encouraging use they need to be wider than any current guidelines you may have. Especially as Resident of Witney pedestrians, cyclists and mobility devices will all be vying for space not to mention scooters and skateboards. Continuing on the practical note, as you know cyclists and scooters do use these paths as a slalom course weaving in and out of other users. So can you please produce a code of practice, available in public buildings and online. As a reminder to be respectful of each other. Young children can be unpredictable and other user’s may have senses that are no longer 100% perhaps hearing and balance. Finally with a reminder that conventional pavements are not a shared space.

Re: "directional cycle signing" - This is an unnecessary waste of money. Nearly all who use this route by foot or cycle will be residents who already know where they are going & how long it will take them. We have too much urban signage cluttering the town already.

Re: "review cycle parking and improve if necessary" - Please consider repositioning the parking racks in Resident of Witney Welch Way by the pedestrian crossing. They add to the clutter there (bus shelter/plant pots/signs/lamps/bins/bollards/benches/trees) that already obstructs the view of the crossing for motorists & the view of the road from the crossing for pedestrians & wheelchair/scooter users. See...

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.7867521,- 1.486794,3a,72.9y,110.02h,77.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZLfqecUdccF5lvELzrXUAw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656? hl=en

The loss of parking on the north side of corn st will have a negative affect on residents in corn st and Resident of Witney adjacent roads. Also the loss of parking spaces will have a very seriously negative effect on Corn St traders who have suffered greatly over the last year. Not everyone is fit and healthy many nned to be able to park close to their door, or for helpers or carers to 179

be able to park close by. Also families with young children need to be able to park close to their door. If the cycle lane is to be provided on the existing very wide footpath there is not a valid reason to remove the parking spaces. A 20 mph speed limit sounds sensible as does a toucan crossing, Making Holloway road one way would probably be a better solution than closing it at Welch Way.

Why hasn't a proposal to extend foot/cycle access along the east edge of Witan Way to the footpath at the Witan Way roundabout? To get from Bridge Street to the Langel Common footpath currently requires crossing Witan Way twice. Resident of Witney Once at a busy three-way traffic light controlled junction and again at a busy roundabout. There is a shortcut trodden through the undergrowth between Witan Way and the river that is passable in the dry, but not friendly to cyclists or mobility users, and potentially dangerous to pedestrians as it isn't wide enough if someone cycles past.

Really concerned how this proposal will effect residents in Applearth Court.

A turning point other than the entrance to Applegarth Court must be considered. Applegarth Court is a private road with maintenance funded by the residents. Resident of Witney The double yellow lines safeguarding the entrance must be made wider - re my request to OCC Highways August 2019 "ENQ1984511" Still awaiting action.

I welcome the remainder of your plans for Witney, especially the introduction of a 20mph speed limits and the new bicycle routes

It may encourage cyclists more but I doubt it. Witney is a rural hub and draws many people in from the Resident from villages who have to drive in. This is not going to be of benefit to these people. Public transport is also surrounding area lacking. Inclement weather also will reduce the cyclists need,and we get plenty of that. How many cyclist do actually see in Witney,not many,out jam the countryside,loads!!

As a resident of Applegarth Court (private road) your proposal will have a hugely negative impact on my life. Resident of Witney I would not have bought my property in [redacted] 2019 had I known of this proposal. The blocking of Holloway Road at the Corn Street end will cause massive problems. Holloway Road will become a huge cul- de-sac with no turning space at the blocked end. 180

Have you considered how much traffic will be entering/leaving Holloway Road at the junction with Welch Way? You will need to put double yellow lines on Holloway Road in order for traffic to pass in both directions. This will impact the residents of Holloway Road, many of whom have daily carers visiting their homes by car, and also those who normally attend day centres, or are taken shopping, by mini-buses that pick them and their wheelchairs up. We in Applegarth Court are concerned about access for emergency services, rubbish collections, removal vans and any other delivery vehicles. As we are a private road we are concerned about people using our road as a turning space, both for reasons of inconvenience and for potential damage to a road that we pay for the upkeep of. This already happens sometimes.

Your proposal will increase traffic hugely on Welch Way and will vastly increase pollution as there will be queues of vehicles either waiting to turn into or out of Holloway Road, or merely waiting behind those who are trying to do so. This will also impede vehicles trying to get into the car parks of the Hospital and the Windrush Health Centre.

What about Police and Fire Service vehicles? I can't see this making response times anything other than slower.

Most residents are in favour of walking and cycling. However all that is required for Holloway Road is measures to reduce speed.

Businesses on Corn Street are not all aware of your proposals as being closed for Covid lockdown some have not received your correspondence. 3 weeks for a consultation, during a national lockdown, seems very far below 'best practice' for a consultation.

Waste of money! Not safe for families with young children. Instead of wasting money on this scheme why not improve the existing bridleways that connect the surrounding villages to Witney, creating active travel for Resident of Witney EVERYONE. This would bring more tourism to the area if we had a great cycle routes in to Witney. Also The money would be better spent on opening the old railway track as greenways. This would connect from Carterton to Witney to Eynsham and on to Oxford. Other counties have done similar with great success! Shared pedestrian/cycling spaces are a really terrible idea. It is bad enough cyclists routinely cycling on Resident of Witney pavements with no action taken against them making it incredibly unsafe for us pedestrians. Shared spaces would be even worse. I avoid walking across Langdale for this reason i feel really unsafe walking with

181

cyclists whizzing by. Making shared spaces I feel will just make cyclists feel they have the right to put us pedestrians at risk by cycling on pavements even more. I won’t walk on a shared route. Cyclists don’t even use the cycle paths that have been put in for them. I think this is a colossal waste of money and Witney has higher priorities.

The proposals are likely to have very little additional impact on active travel, the proposals are targeted at a relatively small radius of Witney itself, those people can negotiate the current provision without any real difficulty. The key driver for any cost effective benefit for cycling provision is to make it safer for a larger portions of society to adopt for multiple benefits and from a greater, wider catchment area north leigh cycleway is a great example of the accepted norm for a cycle path. width always erroded by lack of clearing proximity to traffic ie half a foot away from oncoming 50/60mph cars would you take small kids on that? the emphasis should be connectivity. upgrading the numerous ie bridleways, creating active 'greenways' so that the active travel is pleasant, safe, Resident of Witney thus sustainable. Until these primary factors are considered you are quite literally wasting my money, "if you build it they will come" not on the current network! It needs some considered thought. Who decided on placement of bike railings near Mike Wheelers? that's the last time I would see my £2000 mountain bike! Green ways, they exist! improve them, make them usable, why do you think they are there! they didn't have cars then. The old railway line to carterton would make a fantastic green route given the unprecedented increase in housing provision this could alleviate a potentially hugely expensive traffic counter measures. don't think of this as a leisure/green option these exist obviously think of it as a strategic holistic transport policy this should release a real budget!! be ambitious this scheme is merely lip service to a problem that will increase!

By implementing the proposals it looks like it will be great for cars and bikes but more traffic jams and inconvenience for cars. By creating more traffic jams and inconvenience for cars it will lead to cars sat in traffic jams for longer polluting the area more which will have a detrimental effect on residents health and the Resident from health of the cyclists demand walkers who have to travel next to the traffic jams. This is being done in the surrounding area wrong order, dont try to persuade people to use bikes by causing them inconvience instead find solutions for car parking that means less people need to bring cars into the centre which then leads to creating the space for cycle lanes. Perhaps a one way system up Corn Street, along Witen Way, left at the roundabout to travel round the back of waitrose up to traffic lights, left onto High street and then out along Welch way. This would keep the same number of car parking spaces but as traffic is only going in one direction it means only one

182

carriage way is needed on the circuit and the other carriage way can be used for cycling and buses. If all traffic travels in one circuit it will also create less traffic jams and flow more freely, so a win on all fronts including reducing polution.

1 - I think the cycle way along Corn Street is ridiculous. The road is far too narrow for the combined use of cycles, cars, buses and lorries let alone parked vehicles. A better and cheaper solution would be to keep the existing closure of the High Street and provide a dedicated cycleway along it then continue it along Welch Way - which could have a 20mph speed limit and is far wider allowing easier and better separation also a more level ride - to Tower Hill. This cycle lane would also connect to Woodford Way which already has cycle lanes - that go nowhere at present - and could continue over the new bridge and road to Hailey Road, allowing safer and easier access than via Bridge Street and West End. 2 - If Corn Street was not used there would less reason for closing Holloway Road, which would hardly become a Rat run as it is essentially a single lane road due to the parked cars along its entire length. Resident of Witney Closing roads only puts more traffic and congestion onto existing roads. 3 - With reference to crossing 10 on Oxford Hill a better solution would be traffic lights and islands at the crossroads from Church Lane, allowing cycles to continue straight across instead of having to go up Oxford Hill to a Toucan crossing and then back down, this would remove the temptation to just cut straight across and therefore safer and easier. 4 - With regard to a 20mph speed limit, most of the time traffic hardly goes that fast in the town due to the general congestion, which probably causes more pollution. Sort out the overall traffic flow first by finally building the roads you keep promising, then people will be more likely to follow any reduced speed limits and be able to drive smoother instead of constant stop start, therefore reducing the temptation to speed to make up lost time. I work outside of Witney but have to travel through by car on the way. the closure of roads and addition of Resident of Witney cycle lanes will increase traffic congestion in cars and make my journey take longer.

Closing Holloway road would be detrimental to the whole scheme.The impact of doing this has not been Resident of Witney assessed alongside the impact of installing other measures. There is also no apparent provision for vehicles needing to turn at the top of Holloway road or in Corn St.

Resident of Witney - i live on holloway road near corn street - very concerned about delivery lorries for 3 horseshoes and other businesses that will have to reverse and 183

turn around in front of my house. - will be more pollution and noise outside your front door - i am a blue badge holder and this will make it more difficult for me to get about my daily life e.g. going to sainsbury's easily - can you instead do a system that allows local residents on holloway road to allow to pass through the closure using cameras

I like to cycle, but I think it is unwise to improve cyclying at the expense of cars (or other vehicles for that matter).

The main factors affecting my decision to cycle are: 1) The weather 2) If I am with my wife (often), who cannot cycle 3) The amount of heavy items I am intending to buy, or if I’m on my way somewhere else (less likely), thus making cycling unfeasible.

The Active Travel Scheme does not help solve those issues. Any other improvements would be secondary. The best improvements would be smooth surfaces (road or pavement) and more bike racks other than by Resident of Witney Waitrose.

Walking is also affected by the main three factors listed above, as well as time, which I have a huge lack of.

As a cyclist and driver, I find 20mph very annoying. When cycling, I'd rather a car just hurried up and passed me; slower traffic tends to result in a more constant stream of traffic, which makes turning right etc. more difficult. As a driver, slower speeds cause boredom and lack of attention.

I sometimes use Holloway Road by car, but only if I happen to be near one end and thus it makes more sense than using the high street. Of course, I have been using it much more lately because of the closure of the high street. In general I do not like the phrase “rat run”: this is a public through-road, if residents do not like vehicles passing then they should have lived in a cul-de-sac.

Business owner I only know that it will effect badly my business on corn street and my other busienss which is also conviniece store on market square

184

It will effect as badly as Covid did Not only mine but all of corn street and market square businesses When council has stopped vehicles entering the market square roundabout We as business as a coustomer has been hugely impacted and now bus and cycle lanes only will kill our business rest earnings too We will be badly broke or might have to be bankrupted and we don’t want to do that We would highly appreciate and we would highly be thankfull if council don’t take this brutal decision because with due respect it will be brutal for all of my two businesses all of corn street and market square businesses There is only corn street and then market square as a nice high street and if it’s closed for local people it will be too much for us and then to bear I Appologise before hand if u felt I have said some thing wrong but too much to take in after i got to know about this thankyou

While "increased cycling" is theoretically an overall laudable aim, its simplistic roll-out may well not meet all anticipated objectives. For example: - This scheme is unlikely to result in multi-car owning households in Madley Park, Cogges, etc giving up/ selling any one or more of their cars in lieu of cycles - "Cycling" is very unlikely to substitute for car-borne heavy weekly shopping trips, "school runs" etc especially in winter/ wet/ colder/ darker weather - Failure to provide a segregated cycleway is likely to create an increase in the existing problems caused by anti-social / "aggressive" cycling whereby pedestrians are hit, forced off paths/ pavements, having clothes or Resident of Witney shopping bags torn ... and for all of which there is (a) no recording mechanism or (b) recourse against the culprit-cyclist(s), or ... "Aggressive pavement use by cycles and other "two wheelers" against pedestrians is (sadly) an increasing danger

More practical, safety and regulatory measures will be needed to deal (for example) with the obvious pinch- point and other potential issues. For example: - clear verbal signing (since cyclists do not have to demonstrate Highway Code knowledge of symbols etc) including of and for non/ cycling zones, routes, "feeders", ... - for children and others on the two Windrush bridges where cyclists too frequently ride at them (when

185

watching wildfowl, feeding, playing pooh sticks, ... ) - speed-control measures such as regular barriered chicanes across the whole width to prevent short-cutting evasion etc

It is also difficult to assess whether the format of this feedback form may introduce bias ... (eg. use of modes of transport in Covid versus non-Covid times ... )

Due to the Covid Pandemic many of the business in Corn Street are not attending their premises. The three week consultation period is much too short and should reflect that of a usual consultation period of 6/12 weeks.

Also, if the council is going to such trouble to promote walking/cycling and green space why is the proposal still suggesting allowing buses to access Corn Street? Should the Council, with such and advantageous opportunity, not give serious consideration to closing the top end of Corn Street to vehicles completely (other than walking and cycling), cobble or pave that area and make into an attractive cafe culture area for all Resident of Witney Witney residents to enjoy (from Scott Fraser Estate Agends, down to the Three Horseshoes). This would reinvigorate a lovely Victorian street and make it an attractive visitor area (sitting nicely alongside Church Green and giving Witney residents something to be proud of). This would bring some much needed re- invigoration and genuinely add to the attractiveness of the town centre. Most market towns do not allow buses directly in town centre. Bus stops could be moved to more strategic central points and promote walking.

I also note that the consultation does not include a much needed cycle track from the new Windrush Estate, at the top of Curbridge Road, which is virtually a small town, built essentially for families and they have no safe cycling route in to the town centre. I note Madley Park is considered so why not Windrush too?

The proposals take no account of the needs of elderly people like me who do not cycle, who walk when it is convenient to but rely on their car to get to and from town most of the time. The proposals for Corn Street and Holloway Road will disrupt that and take no account of where the displaced traffic will go. Resident of Witney

I agree that the fiveways roundabout needs to be made safer for pedestrians, not just crossing from Tower Hill to Corn Street but crossing over Ducklington Lane and Curbridge Road too, it's dangerous trying to cross there at busy times.

186

I contend that few people need to cycle from east Witney to west Witney, most will want to cycle to the town centre and back again. Therefore, the east-west route need not be continuous. Instead of routing it down Corn Street the west part could go down Welch Way (which has plenty of width) and terminate at the High Street. The east route could terminate at the Butter Cross. The few people who want to continue across town simply have to cycle about 300 metres along the High Street to link the the two.

This will have a detrimental effect for residents and traders of Corn St. Reducing the parking spaces for residents and traders is a negative result. Half the passing trade will disappear and at a time when businesses are struggling and half the shops in High St have closed down or are closong down. Also no loading or unloading on the north side - what about draymen for the pubs and general suppliers to the shops. Also there are families with small children on the north side. Will thay have to struggle across the road to load up thier children, pushchairs etc into their car - if they can find a space. People take children to Resident of Witney Batt School on their way to work, where do are they expected to stop? Why can't the current very wide pavement provide for both cycling and walking. People head into Witney mainly to go shopping. Residents in Corn St will have a detour represnting a far longer journey (measured in miles) whether they go to Waitrose or Sainsburys. You can't do a grocery shop on a bicycle. Have you counted the cyclsts using Corn St? I would like to know how many there are. If you increased it by 500% it would remain very, very few. Currently I see literally 1 or 2 per hour. Sounds like some serious overkill inconveniencing so many people and spoiling their current living standards. 20mph is acceptable, if enforced. Holloway Road one way would be acceotable. People visit Witney because of the parking available, please don't spoil this great town asset.

We access via ducklington junction and corn street to avoid traffic coming in from east end. This will make Resident of Witney access & traffic worse. Build the shores green junction and access roads as you should have done years ago

The number of pedestrians using Langel common path at the moment and trying to maintain social distancing is impacting on safety in relation to cyclists trying use the cycle lane. Some cyclists have had to Resident of Witney resort to walking/pushing their bikes through this section of the route. While welcoming the 20 mph limit for Church Lane, on street parking close to the Meadow View junction blocks visibility in both directions of the lane when exiting this site causing a potential hazard for both pedestrians and cyclists and particularly school children. ( Some of the vehicles parked near this junction are

187

vehicles from local car repair facilities )

I have noticed in recent months that there is an increase in the number of pedestrians walking across Langel Common, all trying to maintain social distancing, which has resulted in many pedestrians unfortunately encroaching on the cycle lane as a necessity. I also note that there is no mention of repairs to the 2 bridges Resident of Witney on the common, both of which are in a very poor state of repair? While I welcome the implementation of a 20 mph limit on Church Lane, vehicles parked near the turning to Meadow View endanger both cyclists and pedestrians as there is impaired visibility on turning out of Meadow View. This has become more noticeable now there are many more pedestrians and cyclists using this route.

We strongly Object to the closure of Holloway Road at Junction with Corn Street The closure will create one large and narrow cul-di-sac. Large and small vehicles including all delivery vehicles parked facing up Holloway towards the barrier will find it impossible to turn around to leave via Welch Way. The only place to turn will be near the Corn Street barrier (which is too narrow for Large Vehicles to 3 point turn) or into Applegarth Court or its drive way. The residents of Applegarth Court are responsible for the cost of maintenance and repair of their block paving road. This entrance will be gated, and a designated turning area will need to be created to allow vehicles to turn. The council will need to prove they can turn 2-3 large vehicles around (in this area) at the Resident of Witney same time without wrecking the Three Horseshoes and surrounding buildings. Applegarth and Holloway Road residents quality of life will be impacted, including the aggravation of driving up and down to the bottle neck at Welch Way, which will be impacted (trying to leave) by the Corn Street no through road traffic being diverted to Welch Way from the 5 Ways. The closure will also impact the Police response times getting to Corn Street and areas and beyond.? Good Signage advising motorists that Corn Street is not open to through traffic, will after a short period of time convince drivers there is no point driving up Corn Street only to escape down Holloway Road - the so called rat run. Why would any body chose Holloway Road to get to Welch Way, when they can via the 5 Ways Roundabout. Creative Signage at the entrance of Holloway Road from Corn Street would also help along the lines of "Access Only" - "Residents Parking"

188

I can see no reason to close Holloway Road?. The Bus, Walkers and Cyclist's all pass over many access and road openings coming up Corn street from the 5 Ways, another one at Holloway Road is not going to be a problem for them. So why close it if the residents of Holloway road are happy to leave it open. I suggest you start the scheme with Holloway Road remaining open from both ways; together with creative and prominent signage, and review the situation in 4 or 5 months from opening to see if you have a problem.

The closure of Holloway road at Corn St will be a problem for residents and visitors of Holloway Road because wherever they park on the road (whichever way they park, either North or South facing) will always have to turn their vehicle round in the street somewhere. Those living north of the Witney College road entrance will most likely turn at that very junction, causing problems to residents who live there and/or worse Resident of Witney still travel to the end of Holloway Road at the blocked off entrance to corn street and turn in to Applegarth Court to carry out the manoeuvre, blocking residents coming out of Applegarth Court and increasing traffic problems. Numerous delivery drivers, delivery trucks and visitors to the residents, refuse trucks will all have to do a similar thing potentially causing chaos. I also have a concern for the emergency services.

Agree with increased cycle tracks in many places. If cyclists were compelled to use these it would be safer for them and removes them from roadway where some drivers seem to take delight in passing too close and fast. The main issue as far as I'm concerned are the changes to Corn St. There is no consideration for businesses situated there or for the increases in traffic at the other places where cars would come into Resident of Witney Witney. The Mill St roundabout is often very congested, at rush hour it can take 5 mins or more to get from Woodford Way lights to the roundabout, Welch Way is a major shopping area and position of Abingdon and Witney College and involves a busy set of lights in order to get to car parks. Cycling and walking is important but cars also need to access the town centre. Another issue is that there is only one way to cross the river- Bridge Street- as the 4 way junction at Shores Green STILL hasn't been built despite the decision in 2012.

I live in Applegarth Court just off Holloway Road and believe closing the entrance from Corn Street to Resident of Witney Holloway Road would have a detrimental affect on us. Holloway Road is already very congested and access to our home would become even more difficult if we cannot get through from Corn Street.

Resident from We cycle as a family from South Leigh into Witney, the Oxford Hill road will still not provide any designated surrounding area cycle route and the paths on this section are to narrow to ride down. This would only be improved by 189

removing parking from one side of this road. In addition, unless routes have a physical barrier the safety for cyclist, especially children, is sub optimal.

Very disappointing, one has to cycle on Curbridge Road, Fiveways roundabout, Welch Way, Tower Hill and Corn Street. This does not encourage under confident cyclist from Witney South to cycle into the town centre.

We favour the proposed 20mph regulations.

Suggest barriers are removed alongside Madley Brook leading to Cedar Drive and that the barriers at Wood Bank are rearranged to 1.5m to accommodate mobility scooters.

Upgrading and resurfacing the footbridge at Woodbank over Madley Brook, with lighting for shared use.

Upgrading the crossing at OxfordHill junction with Church Lane.

Resident of Witney Langel Common path from Witan Way to Church Lane gets very congested. Suggest it is widened by 1m and widening the bridges.

Crown Lane cycle route should be signed for clarity.

Zebra crossings on Corn Street at Marlborough lane and the Market Street entrance.

A parallel crossing at the Fiveways end of Ducklington Lane and Welch Way to give cyclists and pedestrians vision when accessing Ducklington Lane and Welch Way.

Shared use access of Corn Street footpath near Fiveways to accommodate the buses waiting by the bus garage..

Remove barriers along side the cemetery at Fettiplace Road to allow access for mobility scooters and larger cycles.

190

In my view Madley to town centre is already adequately served by cycle routes. 5 ways roundabout needs attention as does the roundabout at the bottom of Hailey road and the double roundabout. The most Resident of Witney annoying thing about cycle paths is when you have to stop to cross roads where as if you cycle on the road you can just keep going. Station lane and duckling ton lane are quite annoying when cycling with my family. We're fine cycling along then all have to stop to wait for each other and get off our bikes to cross the road and then get back on again etc etc etc. Representative from a It is not a viable proposition group or organisation

I would not use Corn Street as the route, I would use Welch Way and redirect. Welch Way is already wide and can accommodate the changes better. Restricting the direction, parking numbers and flow of traffic in Corn Street will be the death of it as a Resident from commercial area and this is not necessary. surrounding area Witney is a main service centre for a great many of rural villages who may or may not have a limited bus service. Older people will not cycle miles along country roads to shop in Witney. We drive park and walk. Not all older people have or need a disabled parking badge but many cannot walk far. If you want to stop commerce in Corn Street and turn it completely residential, this will do it ! It’s ok changing things but you have to inforce them.? We need speed cameras in Mill st Bridge st and a Resident of Witney weight limit so this heavy lorries are not polluting our air.

The traffic displaced from the eastbound section of Corn Street will put additional pressure on already oversaturated town centre junctions and further reduce resilience.

The exemption of buses and cycles on the Corn Street one-way section introduces potential for traffic Resident of Witney collisions as this appears to be uncontrolled.

Traffic no longer able to access Church Green/Henry Box School due to the Corn Street one-way proposal is likely to use The Crofts and drop off at Old Rectory Mews. Deterrents should be considered in this area to mitigate the possible increase in traffic.

191

In my opinion the proposed scheme will have a negative and detrimental impact on Witney and its residents. Resident of Witney all the business in the town centre will suffer & some will never recover. If the plans get the go ahead Witney will end up like Abingdon, a virtual ghost town with all the businesses moving to out of town retail parks etc. I whole heartily object. The impact on the local environment will be hugely detrimental too.

I have concerns about any widening of pavements on Tower Hill as the road is already quite constricted given the increasing amount of traffic going past my house. This will increase once the housing development on Burford road is up and fully functional. However, I agree more SAFE access for pedestrians and bikes needed on Tower Hill, there is only a narrow Resident of Witney pavement on one side and bikes currently use this as well, going in both directions. At present I can't envisage how the pavement can be widened to allow safe passage for both pedestrians and cyclists without increasing congestion and ensuing air pollution as a result. The amount of heavy lorries labouring up Tower Hill is already an issue for residents, I don't see that slowing them down is going to help here..

Church lane footpath. Recently repaired but has no slope so it easily gets pools developing after rain. We then have to walk in the road. Cycles come up to you without warning (need bells) and could cause an accident. Resident of Witney Suggest either improving footpath so it drains properly or widen it to ensure pedestrians are separated from cyclists and cars. Make it a rule that cyclists have bells and use them when sharing road with pedestrians. Also electric bikes are v fast and quiet. Suggest they have max speed of 10mph. And have bells. Footbridges x2 over Langdale are too narrow now. Will need to be wider or have another.

When I walk from Tower Hill into town, the easiest, most pleasant route is along Moorland Rd to Marriot's Walk - an experience that would be greatly improved if the miserable and poorly maintained path between the hospital & Woodford Way car park was half decent! Resident of Witney If I were to cycle into town, the easiest & most pleasant route is along Welch Way - it's flat & wide & level & is just as close to the shops most people use as Corn Street. Why would I run the gauntlet of speeding busses the length of Corn Street & the motorists' madness around Marlborough Lane at school pick-up times, whilst riding uphill?

192

If the Henry Box kids need to cycle to school, then I would suggest they go only partially along Corn Street, then via The Crofts & in through the back gate. Or, better still, avoid Corn Street totally, by using the existing wide cycle path up Ducklington Lane & cut across to The Leys or The Springs.

I would welcome the widening of the footpaths between Swan Laundry & The Red Lion, even if it means that section of Corn Street becomes a one-way street.

I would suggest the bus route is changed, so that the busses stop in Welch Way, High Street, Langdale Gate & Witan Way. Then the eastern end of Corn Street could be pedestrianised, with access for deliveries. A bit like Cornmarket, Oxford. Obviously, the busses could still access their garage from the Welch Way roundabout, but there really is no need for them to be allowed further east than that.

Making Corn street one way will be a disaster for Witney and specifically the businesses on Corn Street. I Resident of Witney don’t know who thought of it but they obviously don’t live in Witney. 20 MPH is not safer than 30 MPH as drivers are looking at their Speedo rather than looking out of the window. They are a joke and I formally object to all of them including Burford and Chipping Norton and proposed in Witney. Roads will become more congested Corn Street East bound will become a dead end with Holloway Road Closed, this poses several problems, 1) Cars will have to do a U-turn in the proposed Bus / Cycle Lane, 2) access for emergency vehicles restricted, 3) increased road pollution from the increased traffic.4) increased parking difficulties for residents, 5) bus stop locations would inhibit traffic flow, 6) current illegal parking at Market square end not addressed Resident of Witney but made worse. Corn Street residents will not be able to drive 1 mile to Supermarkets, the Journey distance increased to 6 miles increasing vehicular pollution and traffic on Ducklington Lane, Station Lane and Witan Way. Welshway Roundabout (I assume is what you refer to 5 ways, which is actually in Charlbury) changes are OK. Tower Hill; Any narrowing will cause accidents from passing vehicles. Market Square 20mph, nobody currently drives that fast there and from Corn Street North the road road is closed. Church lane over Langel Common, this requires opening up to Vehicular traffic use to increase late night

193

safety and provide access to the shopping areas now that the Cogges Link road has be refunded. Oxford Hill will become clogged once shores green has been implemented. Madely park was designed without sufficient private parking, therefore the majority park along the roads, 20mph is not possible with the shape traffic calming and parking so why increase the risks of accidents? changing the road layout will not result in a reduction of vehicles parked, only reduce access for emergency vehicles. the crossing location outside Woodgreen school on Woodstock road is very dangerous with the south side obstructed by a tree.

It’s a real pity the scheme doesn’t include any improvements for cyclists along Bridge street, and along Witan way. There is a pathway along Witan way on the left that’s ok but very hidden and there’s another just Resident from after the Windrush leisure centre but it’s so overgrown the path is obscured plus it doesn’t go further enough surrounding area .....we needed to collect something from Screwfix and had to go on the busy road. Wouldn’t it be a quick win to maintain the paths already in place? Also could there be scope to link the path near Cogges farm to others say along the Windrush river say for families ? Such cycling paths would be SO popular. I’ve cycled the Camel trail in Cornwall between Bodmin and Padstow a few times and it’s was teeming

As a resident of The Crofts introducing an eastbound bus and cycle only lane at Corn Street, where general traffic will only be allowed westbound will negatively impact access to my home! As well, non-residents Resident of Witney already use the street for parking so reducing the Corn Street parking will just increase the stress upon Corn Street residents having to fight for parking outside their own home with fewer spaces. Restricting the eastbound traffic will mean that I need to drive further on my commute, doing the weekly food shop and in other activities - having the opposite affect on the environment than intended.

Most proposals are positive and will benefit those living here. I have significant concerns regarding the changes in Corn Street, specifically the proposals regarding closure of traffic in one direction and parking Resident of Witney restrictions. This has the potential to negatively impact some residents, and, therefore, I feel more consultation should take place with the residents of Corn Street before any decision is finalised.

We are in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limits: the whole of Madley Park including Woodbank; Resident of Witney Church Lane; Langdale Gate; Church Green and down to Station Lane including The Leys; Upper High Street; Welch Way from the High Street to Woodford Way; Corn Street and all its side roads. This is a good 194

first step Five Ways roundabout: The crossing on Corn Street is not suitable for cycling. The road layout and the position of the crossing mean people cycling are denied the information they need to decide if it is safe to cross. How about moving the crossing further from the roundabout and making it a Parallel Crossing. It would be good to improve the service to active travellers by installing a Parallel Crossing on Welch Way as well. Where possible make the approach to the crossings perpendicular to the road to improve visibility of approaching traffic. LTN 1/20 section 10.4.12 states "Parallel crossings can be used on links and on the arms of priority-controlled and roundabout junctions."It would be good if the southern side of Corn Street near Fiveways is made shared use with a dropped kerb access to allow people cycling to avoid the buses parked in the bus stop awaiting a driver changeover.

Why are there no plans here for Welch Way? The pavement along the road would need minimal widening to allow shared space for cyclists and pedestrians. This is segregated from the road and would provide a safe area. The proposals are cheap and dangerous at best. Very little improvement to safety for cyclists. Why is it Witney has suffered so badly with Resident of Witney basic infrastructure for cyclists for such a long time? Incremental additions and improvements over certainly the last 20 years of my life would have delivered monumental change that the town deserves. Yet we see more and more houses with no change to infrastructure. Disappointing these don't go further and provide a safe and necessary scheme the town deserves.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your controversial scheme. Corn Street is most relevant for us so our comments are based here. * Corn Street is a minefield of sideroads and entrances to property which makes it a difficult street to put bus lanes in yet alone a cycle route. A campaign many years ago to make Corn Street safer for pedestrians took years to implement and saw the build outs you refer to put in place - you now propose to take these out and Business owner put in a cycle/bus lane. As you are aware Corn Street is a long road, so how do you propose safe crossing for pedestrians, apart from one new crossing by Marlborough Lane. As to Cross Town Active Travel Route, we already have one in the cycle/pedestrian lanes which travel west to east from Ducklington Lane to the Leys with a safe underpass of the road. This was put into operation as a safe route into the center of the town rather than along busy Corn Street. Also cyclist and buses do not mix very well as Oxford testifies!! *Tower Hill - you propose widening the Northern path to facilitate cycle/pedestrians. Do you propose cutting down the mature trees to do this as how else can this be done?

195

* Five Ways Roundabout - This is already a 'tight' roundabout to negotiate whilst turning onto Corn Street. If you widen the pavement to accommodate the cycle lane this will make the situation worse unless you intent taking pavement from the southside? Please do not implement this: it will not make our lovely Market Town any safer and will cause more problems in other parts of the town. We have operated a business for over 46years and as do many more business in Corn Street, require vehicle access for customers and deliveries. We are also resident and the only part of these measure's we can agree on in the 20mph speed limit. Another concern is the mention of yet more traffic signage - surely recent countrywide thought is to reduce street furniture not add to it!

Danger of cyclists ignoring pedestrians and going too fast; Danger that if barriers are removed e.g by Wood Green/ Madley that motorbikes etc will use the area Resident of Witney

Woodbank footpath to oxford Hill would be a real positive as flooded at times with lighting along the footpath would make it safe at night

looking at it a total waste of money. Could be used for total purposes. Ie a speed camera so you can catch Resident of Witney people speeding down or up in CORN STREET. I is quite frightening what speed they do here. One of these days there are going to be a nasty accident if nothing is done about it. Plenty of children and elderly people about who cross the road.

Hi. Parking is already very limited on Corn Street and this will only make the situation worse. This adds additional problems if you have young children to get into the car and no off-street parking, which is the case for us and a large number of Corn Street residents. In addition, all residents in the area who need to travel to Resident of Witney certain places within Witney - eg the supermarket - will have to make considerably longer journeys. With heavy bags driving is our only option and we anticipate having to spend far longer driving there under the new scheme so we feel that it will have the opposite effect to the one that is desired. We would seriously ask you to reconsider this plan. Thank you!

One area that has been missed, which is highly dangerous for walkers and cyclists is the junction of Resident of Witney Weavers Close and The Crofts! Cars park on the corner with no regard for people on foot, also cars have to drive to the centre of the road to see when it is clear to approach The Crofts. Could yellow lines, as is the case for Saxon Way, be considered as a matter of priority to prevent a serious accident. When Henry Box 196

leave school there are children everywhere which is difficult when negotiating this junction.

The plans between Madley Park and Oxford Hill are hope less, ill informed and useless. Someone from your office needs to get out and look at these routes. Why put a 20mph limit in a cul de sac?

Resident of Witney Corn Street will be a fiasco, it needs the one way to include buses (and taxis) and move the bus stop outside the Como Lounge down to outside the Halifax Bank

There is no provision for Burford Road or Burwell.

Being unable to park outside of our property on Corn Street (even for a limited time as is currently the case) will make life much more difficult for my family. Similarly those dropping off children at the local primary Resident of Witney school will now struggle to do so. Corn Street is already a fairly quiet road and further traffic calming measures / removal of vehicle access is unnecessary.

Resident of Witney My car and electric scooter are essential to me.

Would like to have seen a bid to repair roads for the wider local areas. cycling in this locality is dangerous as Resident from you can only look at the road immediately in front of you as so many pot holes. cycling in west oxford is no surrounding area longer a safe or pleasurable thing to do. Cycling in the town with car fumes is not good for health. We need cycle paths on all roads not just in the town centre. Any car journey from the Crofts into town, especially on market days, will cause more traffic on Welch Way Resident of Witney and Ducklington Lane and create more pollution from slow moving or static traffic.

The 20mph speed limit is to be welcomed, but there are a number of issues with the proposals: Resident of Witney 1) Making a section of Corn Street one way will be bad for the environment for those needing access, e.g. parents bringing children to Batt School will have to drive further. Batt has a large geographic catchment meaning that many children there cannot reasonably walk or cycle to school. 197

2) Making buses exempt from the one way system is dangerous and confusing. 3) Mixing a bus and cycle lane (as implied) is dangerous for cyclists. 4) Closing the south end of Holloway Road would be a significant inconvenience and be bad for the environment because longer routes would be driven. For example, we would need to unload our car in Corn Street and then drive its entire length to 5 Ways roundabout, along Witan Way and up Holloway Road in order to park there! 5) The proposals included reducing on street parking in Corn Street and only talk about a further 'review of parking'. Parking is a significant issue for residents of Corn Street; we often have to drive around looking for somewhere to park in side streets, which is bad for the environment and a nuisance for residents of the side streets. 6) We have consistently requested residents' parking for Corn Street, but our requests have only been ignored. Our last such letter was on 2 Nov 20 in response to the consultation about Kerbed Build Outs for buses on Corn Street. Again, no reply, leading us to assume that despite consultations you are not really interested in the views of residents! I hope you will take the opportunity to demonstrate that this consultation is different.

I walk into town a lot. The primary reason being that it is just as quick to walk as it is to get the car out of the garage, drive into town & get parked. But I do not agree with the car-hating ideology prevalent in the OCC, OLEP & other groups of campaigning do-gooders who always dominate the debate around the design & implementation of these schemes. For some people, the use of a car is essential. We should recognise that need & accommodate it with the same enthusiasm so often displayed for so-called 'green' initiatives, such as bus lanes.

As a pedestrian, I frequently encounter problems walking around town. Firstly, the paths are generally in a Resident of Witney very bad state of repair - why aren't they maintained? Secondly, they are often obstructed by parked vehicles - not just in the town, but also around the housing estates, where residents consider the footpath outside their home to be their own private parking space. Thirdly, the constant misuse of footpaths by cyclists, who seem to think they have a god-given right to take the most direct route, regardless of whether it is footpath, amenity land or highway. I see these proposals include more shared paths, which is bad news for us pedestrians & will no-doubt result in more danger to walkers.

Finally, town centre pollution could be greatly reduced if it were a condition of WODC hackney carriage vehicle licences that drivers were prohibited from sitting in their vehicles with the engine running whilst

198

waiting for fares. The emissions produced by a dozen taxis parked in the Market Square for six hours each winter evening with their engines running must surely exceed the savings made by a few extra cycle journeys in the summer months?

I live on Corn Street and while I am positive about changes to this road I have 3 main concerns:

- Will speed limits be monitored/enforced. At present many cars travel at speeds in excess of 30, some dangerously so, especially at the bottom of the road where it slopes down to the roundabout. I have never seen any attempt to enforce the limit, and this should be a priority to make the road safer.

Resident of Witney - I am not convinced that an on-road cycle lane will be as effective as it could be in encouraging people, especially families with young children, who don't normally cycle to do so given the road is also used by double decker buses. A separate bike path would be a better option if possible.

- Closing both the top of Corn St and Holloway Road will create a dead end for cars travelling up Corn Street which will result in cars using the parking spaces on the road having to turn around to travel back down the road. Will provision be put in place for cars to turn around safely?

I really support the 20mph speed limits - this should be the norm in built-up areas.

However, overall this feels like a massive missed opportunity to put in proper segregated cycle lanes and safe junctions which would provide a safer and more welcoming environment for everyone (including children and less confident cyclists) to cycle. Painted lanes on the road are not the same.

Resident from The Five Ways roundabout is really dangerous and the proposed scheme does not change that. It should be surrounding area made possible to cycle safely through the junction, without having to turn up each side road to find a crossing.

Need to remove the barriers leading to Fettiplace Road.

Corn Street - I support making this one way for motor traffic. I'm worried about taking out the narrowings though because cars may go faster.

199

Langdale Gate - really need a proper segregated cycle lane; painted lines are not enough to keep people safe.

Crown Lane - please could it be made clear that cyclists are allowed on this path?

Witan Way roundabout / Witan Way: please could we have a cycle path into the Leisure Centre?

In my experience as a regular cyclist around Witney, Corn Street is a pleasant road to travel along and NOT at all a hostile route to negotiate. If the Council is looking to encouirage cycling around Witney, there are some far more obvious candidates for consideration, for example cycle lanes along Woodstock Road, Curbridge Road, Welch Way, Newland, Bridge Street, Witan Way and extending the excellent cycle track beside Deer Park Road south and east along Thorney Leys to Ducklington Lane and on to Station Lane/Witan Way. All of those roads have given me greater concern to cycle along, so much so that it has seemed safer to go on the pavement at times.

Resident of Witney This proposal fails entirely to address or even recognise the existing conflict which there is between pedestrians and cyclists on the section across the Langel Common between Langdale Gate and Church Lane. This is already heavily traficked with people walking, children in buggies or toddlers running loose, mobility scooters, and people on bicycles. It is often not a comfortable walk because one is always having to watch one's back to see if there is a cyclist coming if one has to pass someone. It is not uncommon for families with young children to congregate on the bridges to feed the ducks or play pooh-sticks which is a potentially dangerous situation with cyclists going past. The existing track is already too narrow for the current volume of traffic and by encouraging more traffic, and with only "minor measures to improve the exsting path", I am sorry to say that this proposal is likely to make the position worse.

I have lived in Holloway Road for 22 years and the amount of traffic doesn't bother me per se, however, I have always found it easier to travel along Holloway Road if I enter from Corn Street and exit via Welch Way. This is because of the parked cars on one side of the road. When entering from Welch Way, the Resident of Witney parked cars on the left and the bend in the road make it very difficult and sometimes dangerous to progress up the hill as you have to keep dipping in between the parked cars to give way to those coming down the hill and it is difficult to see what traffic is coming towards you. A lot of traffic comes in and out of the side road which leads to the College entrance and that, together with residents' vehicles and deliveries, makes a lot of

200

traffic. The plans mention a review of parking but it's not stated whether that means removing parking completely or having time restrictions, or what. I am all for some free road parking but if all vehicles have to enter and leave Holloway road via Welch Way then I believe it would be essential to remove road parking certainly between Welch Way and the upper side road to the College entrance . The road parking thereafter (from the College entrance road to Corn Street) doesn't seem to cause too much of a problem.

2. Fiveways roundabout should have parallel crossings for bikes and pedestrians close to end of main roads to make crossing safe and convenient. Slow traffic to 20mph early on as it approaches this roundabout from all directions. 6. Should include clear, off-road, marked cycle route 7. Slow traffic to 20mph early on as it approaches this roundabout from all directions 10. Toucan crossing should be as direct as possible across from Church Lane to other side, following desire Resident of Witney lines of people and schoolchildren in particular crossing the road, to avoid dog-leg up Oxford Hill (where current Zebra crossing is). School children crossing in this zone so slow traffic to 20mph as it approaches this junction from north-west and south-east, ideally between King Georges Field or Kingsfield Crescent and Judd's Close. 12. Lighting is crucial along this section. 13. Lighting is less important along this section as cyclists and pedestrians can re-route along safer, well-lit parallel route at night.

I am concerned about the lack of change at Fiveways roundabout. I commute into Witney by bike and often Resident from feel unsafe on the roundabout as traffic accelerates onto the roundabout and then can try to overtake or surrounding area underake you. Also the roundabout next to the Leisure centre is hard to manage with children. How will you create enough space on the pavement so that cycles and people have room to pass each other?

Work needs to be done to help all Witney residents to move around the town more easily, but I think the proposals for the west and central areas of the town will not help this. The current fad to improve the environment for cyclists is pie in the sky as very few if any residents who do not already cycle would even Resident of Witney consider it apart maybe for fitness reasons. Car users appear to be bottom of the priority list as far as planners are concerned, indeed making life as difficult as possible for them seems to be top of the list. Do they not realise that most drivers use their cars only when necessary? Price of fuel helps dictate this and even drivers care about the environment! On the map it would have been nice if the word 'centre' had been spelled correctly.

201

I don't think the proposed scheme will benefit enough people. I would love to cycle more but the roads I need to travel on to get to town (Burford Road and Tower Hill) are too busy at present. In the evenings the Resident of Witney speed limits are routinely ignored and people travel down the Burford Road at 50/60 mph. To get to my house I would need to cycle in part on the Burford Road and at present that is not a risk I am willing to take. I would think that more people would be willing to cycle on roads if they knew the speed limit was being policed/observed or if they were reduced to 20mph

I would strongly advise you to take a serious look at the way lorrys vans and cars treat tower hill as a Resident of Witney racetrack,I am a resident of tower hill and I witness the speeding vehicles ever day.Widening the path north side of tower hill with out some traffic calming in place would be extremely dangerous

There was no opportunity to comment as a user of the shops / businesses on corn st, only as the businesses themselves. I believe that these plans will severely impact my use of the businesses and shops on corn st. e.g. I regularly use the Chiropractor there and myself and other customers will find it very difficult Resident from to continue to use this facility if I have to park in one of Witney's main car parks to do so due to my surrounding area decreased mobility. Perhaps buses could be banned from Corn st as it would make using this road safer. These plans are not considering the businesses in corn st sufficiently - corn st is a unique and beautifully individual place to shop, and your plans will go a long way to ruining Witney's individuality as a shopping centre.

I don't think the route to town from Deer Park has been considered fully from a safety point of view. The cut- through by the cemetery is secluded and would put me off using it when it's dark. I have previously been Resident of Witney scared by a man shouting at me on this pathway and subsequently will not use it. I would prefer that the Burford or Curbridge Road had segregated cycle paths as I would feel safer using these at night or in quiet periods. Summary Overall opinion: Object Objections: Resident of Witney Concerns: Disabled people’s needs disregarded – plan not inclusive; need for space to get wheelchairs out of car Support: 202

I am fearful of this so called 'shared' space. I am a wheelchair user: Manual and electric chair (not a scooter). The behaviour of many cyclists in Witney is at best thoughtless and at worse very dangerous. I have had many near misses because of cyclists traveling at speed on the pavement, ( which of course is illegal at present). When I drive in my modified car it will be increasing difficult to get out of my cul-de-sac at the bottom of Corn Street if I can only turn right. The buses already obscure my view by lining up with engines running. Living by the Bus Station is a continued health hazard in terms of pollution not considered years ago. Still new houses are built on the door step of the station. Still the new buses are not electric. They have just purchased a whole new fleet, non electric. I have COPD which over the years I think has been caused by the bus station positioned in a residential area. It should have been moved years ago. To pander to the needs of buses in Witney is disgraceful when you didn't insist on change to electric when they recently purchased their new fleet. If I sound cross it is because I am on health grounds, bus pollution, and on the grounds of the way disabled drivers were treated as a result of this Pandemic. I campaigned with other disabled people to retain disabled parking in the High Street when David Cameron wanted it gone completely. We eventually compromised and it was decided to place the bays it on the left side. We wanted it on the right side near Dentons because the pavement was wider for getting wheelchairs, walkers, crutches, sticks etc safely out of the car. We had to give in and still struggle to get the wheelchair and walkers out on the narrow busy pavement. However, Covid arrived and over night this facility disappeared in a knee jerk reaction. You then appallingly placed 'disabled parking' on a steep hill, boarded by a wall with three narrow steps up onto the pavement!!! Wheelchair users get their chairs out on the pavement side, plus frail walkers,etc. It would be impossible to go anywhere even if the car was facing the wrong way so the passenger side was free as the hill is too steep and there is no pavement to access because of the wall. Maybe you thought all disabled were shielded - well I am but many can only walk a few paces certainly not climb the steps on to the walled pavement . However, I had to go to an emergency eye appointment early evening in Oxford during lockdown. Their dispensary was closed. I said it was ok I could go to Boots in Witney as they were open until 7pm. I drove up the High Street towards Boots and was horrified to find there was nowhere to park my car whilst I got my wheelchair out. I came home and a friend collected the drug for me the next day. Whatever you decide to do to change things for two groups of people, fit walkers, fit cyclists I pray and hope that you reinstate the disabled parking facility in the high Street. In fact that should be done immediately as the way you disregarded our needs was disgraceful. Many of us have suffered on an extra level during Covid: loneliness, cancelled surgeries, less social support more difficult to have health needs addressed. I have endured great pain since March through two cancelled surgeries. All this and then you impact on our lives with a scheme for which I for one as a disabled person am fearful. You don't police

203

the behaviour of cyclists now and I fear they will have total freedom to cycle at speed when they have designated permission. If you need to create more facilties for cyclists then keep them separate from the rest of us as their behaviour is not to be trusted. Since lockdown I have watched cyclists cycle at great speed on the pavement from my kitchen window. The pavement is not wide. One day they are going to knock someone down if they are not policed. I have to add that I am an electric wheelchair user , smaller and slower than a large scooter,and a manual wheelchair user. I feel too, that some scooter users behave badly on the pavements in a similar way to cyclists, dangerous and inconsiderate. Your proposals are based on a mistaken presumption that cyclists and some scooter users behave with consideration when in my experience unfortunately they don't. We still need thoughtful provision for car drivers who are disabled or who need to drive disabled people to access the shops and facilities. Your plan is too narrow in thinking and fully biased towards fit people who cycle or walk. It is not inclusive at all.

Resident from Ducklington roundabout and A415 approach speeds from Standlake need to be addressed to make walking surrounding area and cycling safer.

By closing corn street to traffic eastbound and Holloway Road with increase my car journey to town/leisure Resident of Witney centre/nursery significantly with my two young children so will increase the CO2/CO emissions which will have a negative impact on the environment.

Restricting access to streets will impact on businesses through lack of support. For example, I used to park in the High St briefly to pop into the Coop or elsewhere. I can't do this now so I Resident of Witney shop elsewhere. The streets are too narrow for cycles and cars. The two should be kept separate as far as possible. How much is this costing? The money could be better spent.

We’ve researched it on google earth and coming from 5 ways roundabout the proposed route would add Business owner exactly one mile extra to each journey. There are at least 10 takeaway cars operating 5 nights a week on corn street. Collectively this would add on a addition 100 miles plus per night of Co2 emissions.

Resident of Witney The whole scheme is flawed. You will create huge traffic jams in Witan way which will churn out pollution sat in traffic as well as negatively impacting in people's time. I won't cycle more as I ride a tricycle and feel the 204

roads are unsafe. Additionally I gave a young child and if he is hurt at school I need to get to him ASAP not wait for a 30 minute walk.

I object to more money being spent on more cycle lanes, the ones we have in and around witney aren't always used now. Resident of Witney Cycles still go on the roads and hold the cars up, dangerous for the cyclists and frustrating for the drivers. I would rather see the money spent on a new way across the river by Hailey Road. And the flooding sorted out!

There needs to be more robust enforcement of the parking restrictions in Corn Street. Drivers routinely Resident of Witney ignore them as the know they are unlikely to get a ticket. This causes bottle necks and traffic problems and has a knock on effect of general disregard of parking restrictions in other parts of town. People know the parking wardens don't go out in the dark so they take advantage of it.

Resident of Witney There should be some way of adding a crossing at the bottom of oxford hill for wood green students.

I dont understand why cyclists csnnot use the cycle paths slready provided instead of costs and nuisance of Resident of Witney Corn St changes. At Five Ways roundabout use the cyvlr path to where the old Lidl was. Follow the cycle path to the Leys. At Station Lane use the cycle path to the cycle path to Langel. I feel you are inventing a problem that doesnt exist regarding Corn St. You just need signage.

Resident from The corn street proposal will kill the business on that street, one of, if not the best street in Witney! surrounding area

Resident from The proposed changes on Corn street in my opinion will have a negative impact on the business in surrounding area cornstreet who rely on passing traffic, both in a vehicle and on foot.

The trouble is that the council don’t live in the real world money comes to them for nothing so easy to waste Resident of Witney ...I personally shop in carterton witney will kill off all its business soon and it won’t be coronavirus that does it it will be out dopy council

205

Residents’ parking is essential. We are already in the crazy situation of driving from Corn Street to the town car parks in order to avoid a parking ticket as the time restrictions are longer.

I would be more than happy to walk or cycle if I weren’t fined for not moving my car every 2 hours.

Resident of Witney The crossings at the roundabout need careful consideration.

I am concerned that the traffic surveys for Corn St and Holloway Road have been carried out a) during lockdown and b) while Corn Street was closed. They will give an inaccurate impression of car usage.

Parents dropping children at school on their way to work needs to considered. Closing Holloway Road to through traffic will have a massively negative impact on traffic elsewhere in town. This is likely to make drivers more impatient and more likely to drive aggressively and make the roads more dangerous for cyclists. Also changing corn street into a one way system is going to ruin many local Resident of Witney businesses based down the road, as well as making it extremely difficult for many people to access these businesses. So many negative impacts for a potentially tiny benefit to cyclists. There are many other ways to improve the area for cyclists without hindering motorists so much

Corn Street is narrowed unnecessarily. The Pavements are wide enough. The closing of Corn Street due to emergency sewer repairs demonstrated how much Holloway Road was a necessary route for vehicles, Resident of Witney though this increased traffic pressures. Holloway Road should be resident parking only and residents should creat hard standing for their cars in front of their properties; ie the roadway should have yellow lines, no parking, just deliveries only.

Lower speed limit is fine, but people want convenience and if it's too far to walk from their vehicles they won't walk to the shops in corn street. Use the money to make paving wider, smoother and better dropped curbs. I can still feel my body so any judder sends pain through my body, I'm sick if being tutted at already Resident of Witney and try to use my wheelchair to go into Witney rather than use my vehicle to get me there, but the paving is horrendous in Witney, whether that be broken, with ridges or filled uneven patches and as for dropped curbs they either are in puddles after rain or the curb is still up to 25mm high which has an impact on my body within the wheelchair. Would love for a councillor to go round Witney and see how they feel!!!!

206

I feel the council are putting lively hoods at risk. People come to witney for free parking and great local Business owner produce/shops. They don’t come to witney to cycle around? There are already paths for walking and it’s easy to get around. Why change it?

Resident of Witney I have a car and I use my car, walking and cycling are not an option with back issues and sciatica

I am a cyclist and walk when not on my bike. I am all for more safety measures and designated cycle paths but I don't think a one way system.on Corn Street or Holloway is a good idea...for the reasons I specified Resident of Witney before. Restricting cars through the High Street is great but not nesscecary further than that.

This will cause traffic congestion elsewhere and impact businesses who rely on passing trade from people Resident of Witney who happen to pass by in a car. Also those businesses which attract custoim from outside of witney will lose out as those coming will not be able to park nearby.

Resident of Witney Have you all gone mad?

Witney is dying. Do you wish to kill it altogether? If you have difficulty carrying heavy shopping this will make Resident of Witney it worse!

routes into the high street of Witney are already restrictive. Introducing a 20 mph speed limit along that stretch of road makes absolute sense. However there are better ways to improve the flow than to ban cars Resident of Witney from it and create rat runs elsewhere. First, get rid of the absolutely ridiculous traffic calming measure at the actual intersection of Corn Street and Market Square, the number of close calls and due to people going for it are absurd, along with the chaotic traffic it creates. Second, enforce the double yellow parking ban along that stretch of road. The number of 207

illegally parked cars that create a chicane as buses and cars try to go each way is frankly unacceptable, and yet I have rarely seen a traffic warden there. By making it more and more difficult to drive cars into Witney, all that is achieved is having shoppers go somewhere else. Not all of us enjoy cycling in the rain....

I worry about parking and access to the small businesses on Corn Street, and am also dubious about Resident of Witney walking/ cycle lanes: those which already exist are not wide enough to cater for walkers/cyclists travelling in opposite directions. Personally, I drive from Welch Way to Corn Street via Holloway Road. I wonder if the routes that remain available to motorists will simply lead to longer travel times.

Resident of Witney Hopefully the illegal parking in Corn Street outside the fast food businesses will be monitored closely.

Proposal 4, Corn Street (from Holloway Road to Market Square) is completely unnecessary and, I believe, would be a pointless expense as well as a huge inconvenience to Witney residents and businesses. Reasons:

- It's good to see traffic currently restricted in the High Street, though this just makes continued both-way access along Corn Street more important (it enables a complete two-way round-town circuit along Witan Way, Welch Way and Langdale Gate, avoiding the High Street)

- local takeaway outlets often rely on collections, which means (very) short term parking is required and Resident of Witney crucial to their businesses. Further restricting parking will result in double-parking (more hazardous) and more 'illegal' parking

- local musicians playing at venues such as Fat Lil's and other venues require access and parking to allow for moving heavy equipment. Surely we should be encouraging and welcoming musicians to our town rather than making it hugely impractical to access gigs?

- parking along Corn Street is already limited for residents/visitors - it's a popular and crucial part of the town's economy which, particularly in the evenings, requires people to drive and park

208

- this proposal won't stop people driving or looking for parking. It will, though, encourage people to park nearby elsewhere, clogging up surrounding streets and inconveniencing those who live in them

- Corn Street presents zero additional threat/risk for cyclists above and beyond any other street in Witney. Given cyclists are more likely to be cycling during the day/shopping hours, the restrictions would be a huge inconvenience to everyone else 24x7 - the proposal simply doesn't work for for the benefit of ALL local residents and how/when they use Corn Street.

- I am also concerned that this matter is being decided upon now, during the COVID pandemic, when many people's normal travel needs and methods are far from normal; less traffic, more working from home, potentially more time to walk and cycle, etc. When traffic levels return to normal, this will be simply chaotic.

I would suggest that a better solution for Corn Street would be to remove the two unhelpful 'priority traffic' chicanes, enforce the double yellow lines more effectively, 24x7 - please, open it up for everyone, don't close it down, with respect, for the benefit of a minority! Thanks.

This assumes, as always with these things, that everyone's going to leap to how wonderful it will be to have more cycling. It totally ignores the fact that you can't carry a week's shopping home on a bike. Or a wardrobe. Or get a family of three children onto a bike. Or any number of other things. I, for example, have a disability, and therefore car transport is extremely important. And once again, this Resident of Witney assumes I won't ever need to visit a business, bar, or restaurant on Corn Street in any way other than by bus (which doesn't stop there) or on a bike. There will be a HUGE impact on businesses on Corn Street, which are already struggling. You've already got businesses closing down because the rates are too high and they can't afford to trade. Corn Street will become unviable, like the increasing numbers of empty units around by the car park/cinema complex. Stop. Just stop.

Open up Corn Street instead of restricting it even further. Those bollards should be removed and stringent Resident of Witney measures to stop parking should be introduced and offenders should be heavily prosecuted. Roads are too narrow to introduce dedicated cycling lanes.

The scheme is limited in terms of active travel improvements which will result in any meaningful safety Resident of Witney benefits for the most vulnerable or modal shift away from cars.

209

Whilst 20mpn is welcome as well as minor improvements to lighting and widening along Church Lane off road path to Madley Park.

Key problems. Both roundabouts have not been addressed and are major severance points for people travelling actively including those with disabilities. This should include upgrading provision across the whole junction rather than the proposed 'route corridor'. Motor vehicles have priority and no improvements have been made for anyone else.

The 'on road' cycle facilities up Corn Street do not meet latest design standards and will not make it safer for existing cycles or enable people to switch to walking or cycling from motor vehicles despite sufficient road space for reallocation. The Corn Street one way will require sufficient advance warning and clarification to users of the benefit to locals as well as businesses - this is not stated.

I feel that the traffic caused by cyclists in Witney is already unprecedented and will only get worse with the new proposal. Making these changes will impact on the towns businesses negatively, our town is suffering Resident of Witney enough already without this change. If high Street was reopened then the issues mentioned in the proposal would already be resolved or at least minimised. I do not believe this is a change that is wanted or needed by the residents of our town.

Witney will become a ghost town if you stop people being able to nip into town with on street parking close Resident of Witney to businesses. Recent roadworks at the top of Corn Street, combining with the High Street being closed demonstrated how traffic just gets diverted around town on the already busy major roads and extends the length of journeys. Corn St should not be made one way, also the crossing on Welch Way is dangerous and a toucan crossing Resident of Witney needs to be re - instated here - this has not been addressed by this proposal and is far more important to the town. I am a pensioner with arthritis in my back. I do not have a blue badge because fortunately I can walk two hundred yards (before I get pain and discomfort) which disqualifies me from claiming one. I rely on my car to get around and find the closing of the High St frustrating. I avoid going to the Market Resident of Witney Square if possible and it is becoming a ghost town especially as the result of Covid, many High St shops will close. As a resident of WITNEY for over 50 years I have always tried to support the shops and markets.. 210

As far as I can see your plan will be forcing me to drive further add more fumes to the atmosphere and lose my love of WITNEY. I think your plans appear to be 1) to use up the money given to you by the Government 2) to encourage more people to walk and cycle, which in itself is positive, but i feel it will not produce the result you want 3) ignore the requirements of older people who cannot cycle and find walking any distance painful and prohibitable. 4) a way to overcome the traffic problems caused by the massive house building going on around the town. I have seen the effect pedestrianisation and such restrictive measures has had on other towns. They lose their character and become ghost towns, smaller shops close and at night the centres become dangerous , scaring off older residents. The beautiful market town that I love will be ruined by these extreme measures, ignoring the requirements of those who depend on use of the car. Give us back the lovely town we love. Will make it a lot harder for residents who live on Cornstreet for parking and driving around there home, and Resident of Witney around town. Walking around Witney is very simple, plenty of cycle lanes already in place around the town which are often empty. Resident from Please don't make Corn Street one way, it will cripple businesses who will aleady be struggling to recover surrounding area from the Pandemic

I live on The Crofts so won't need to make use of the cycle way much as I already walk into town. I am fully supportive of encouraging cycling, and would especially like to see 20mph limits on Corn Street and throughout town. One concern is that with the closure to cars going east bound on Corn Street, people will Resident of Witney drive as close as possible and park on The Crofts, especially if parking on the North side of corn Street is no longer available. The Crofts only just has enough parking space for residents as it is, without additional shoppers adding to the problem.

Holloway Road provides a vital route for the small number of residents of the Crofts and Weavers Close who need to access the High Street, Bridge Street or Witney East without this route and the route towards the Resident from Buttercross then they will need to leave Corn Street at Fiveways roundabout which is frequently queued surrounding area back up to the Crofts prior to this proposal.

Closing off the access to Corn Street towards the Buttercross will also mean that the weekly trip to the local 211

supermarket for the family shop where walking is not an option, or the leisure centre will entail a convoluted route via five ways roundabout and then either along Ducklington Road and Station Lane or along Welch Way and the High Street, both of these routes are severely congested around rush hour and will be adding a huge amount of time and mileage onto the residents of Weavers Close and the Crofts.

This increased traffic flow along Corn Street, Ducklington Lane, will have a negative impact on the residents with stationary queuing cars, air quality and pollution. Surely traffic diffusion is better for Witney?

Resident of Witney Apart from personal safety at night it probably won’t make much difference.

The Holloway Road proposal and corn Street proposal will make the school run for children attending The Batt school harder for those parents who have to drive to drop off or collect children before and after work. I Resident of Witney personally already have less than 10 minutes to get between school and work at drop off and pick up time and will not have enough time to get there if I can no longer park on corn Street or Holloway Road.

I support the Windrush bike project submission, especially related to the Tower hill/Corn St Roundabout. I would add that this Roundabout is on the National Cycle Network route 57 and should be part of the best Resident of Witney possible cycling priority, as should all other stretches of this route. The Witney section of the link to Route 442 should be improved/encouraged as well Closure of Holloway road (along with the proposed Corn St one-way system)will give residents and businesses of Corn Street, QED, Orchard Way, Weavers Close and the Crofts area only one point of exit regardless of onward direction of travels.

Queuing is common when attempting to join five-ways round-about from Corn Street since drivers from Welch way and Tower Hill have right of way to get to Ducklington Lane. Resident of Witney

Increased queuing at this point will reduce air quality in this location, hugely increase waiting times and create a significant blockage for cyclists traversing Witney from east to West.

Please maintain access to Holloway Road because this would be significantly positive for residents of Weavers Close and the Crofts area and also reduce negative impacts at the lower end of Corn Street.

212

Increasing cycle access across witan way while increasing the number of vehicles on witan way increases Resident from the chance of RTC incidents and will slow down the traffic that is already begining to build up on that side of surrounding area town

1. Tower Hill: Shared path must be 3 m wide to be safe/viable if shared, with painted central line and lane markings. 2. Five Ways Roundabout: Crossings over Welch Way and Corn Street look too close to roundabout - should be widened for cycle/foot traffic and set back by 10 m or so. (Consider the daily hazard for pedestrians at the Bridge Street zebra crossing which is too close to the roundabout - a pedestrian hospitalized this very evening of 11 Feb.) Best option would be to remodel roundabout in the Dutch style to ensure continuous riding for cyclists. Resident of Witney 3. Witan Way Roundabout: Again, to create a 'continuous east-west route' through Witney requires remodelling this roundabout to allow continuous passage across it. If such isn't planned, please ensure that dropped kerbs are flush with the road surface, not slightly raised (e.g. at Curbridge/A4095), which is dangerous for cycle wheels crossing at an angle. 4. Oxford Hill to Courts Gdns: Better if possible to use currently unsurfaced lane just to the west of existing shared track - segregation best especially when width is constrained by vegetation and fencing. This would also avoid the cycle-unfriendly and pedestrian-endangering kink over the bridge. Who would choose to cycle that way? With the increase in the number of houses being built around witney and the current traffic jams in the mornings and evenings restricting wheres cars can travel will only strangle witney more and kill even more Resident of Witney local businesses. The current cycle lanes are not used fact I think more ride on the pavement then use a cycle lane or the road

Resident of Witney This is a terrible idea how about cutting business rates?

If Corn Street is made car free, people won’t use the shops etc there, which is a great shame as I think most Resident of Witney of them will suffer loss of trade. Traffic accessing the fiveways roundabout from Corn Street is frequently queuing during the busy times this will worsen if residents of Weavers Close and the Crofts have to join these traffic queues if they are unable Resident of Witney to access Holloway Road or head up to the Buttercross along Corn Street.

213

This proposal will effect the residents of Witney who chose to live in the town centre, so as to minimise any car journeys or time spent in the car. The closure of Holloway Road and the top end of Corn Street will create huge detours, lengthy journeys to go short distances such as to the supermarkets, increased pollution, increased traffic.

Holloway Road should be left open to residents of the Crofts, Weavers Close, Top end of Corn Street and residents of Swan Court.

Has any consideration been given to the proposal of making access up to Corn Street towards the Buttercross and no access from the Buttercross to Fiveways roundabout? The reason for the suggestion is that surely traffic levels would be far lower? This reduces congestion and stationary traffic around the Fiveways roundabout, Ducklington Lane and Station Lane. I’ve lived and we on Corn St for several years, and have seen what impact things such as o weather and roadworks have had , equally more so now with Covid , small market towns need as much Resident of Witney support now more than ever, making an important road into the town bud only would obviously have a negative impact on the local businesses that operate there, can’t believe this id even been touted ??

Resident of Witney Lived in Witney all my life. A fair weather cyclist and always felt safe, cycling around Witney.

Resident of Witney Stop being total [expletive redacted]. Difficult I know but you must try.

Preventing traffic in corn Street will be the final nail in the coffin if many businesses. It will become a ghost Resident of Witney town just like Marriots walk, just a load of empty units.

This active corridor is currently for East to West and vice versa, is there any consideration to link up with the north and south of the town? A dedicated link from Hailey to Witney would be good with lighting on the Resident of Witney pathway from Hailey Road to Mill Street as an example. There is no cycle lane surrounding Thorney Leys with cycle lanes ending at the junction of Thorney Leys and Ducklington Lane as well as a cycle lane servicing Deer Park Road terminating at the Curbridge Road roundabout. Would this be a viable option to give the whole town a connected purpose.

214

This seems to be a disproportionate response to a fairly minor issue. Lots of us cycle round Witney and if we’re not happy to cycle on the road there are cycle lanes that take us to most areas. We also walk around Resident of Witney Witney all the time. While I’m not against the promotion of active travel in any way, my concerns regarding Corn Street are that we need sufficient residents‘ parking plus drop off/pick up at the Batt School will be horrendous. I can not see the sense for spending so much money on cyclists when they are in a minority of the population. So many cyclists cycle on footpaths at the moment with disregard for pedestrians so extra lanes might make a difference until the cyclists run out of their lane and they still carry on on the footpaths. Good example is the dual cycle lane / pedestrian path from the traffic lights at the Tesco petrol station to B&Q where they should dismount or move across onto The Thorney Leys Road, the majority carry on cycling on Resident of Witney the path until they get to Burwell Meadow entrance, then carry on cycling using the footpath across Burwell Meadow Recreation Ground. Going the other way from Tesco Petrol station to the Leys area along Station lane the hedge row was encroaching the pedestrian section which meant of course pedestrians had to walk in the cycle lane. In my view cyclists should stay on the main road and obey the Highway Code which includes bells and lights ! Resident parking is already limited and the proposal will have a serious impact on residents and their daily Resident of Witney lives

I am not representing a business, but I consider this plan to be damaging for the remaining businesses on Resident of Witney Corn Street. Reducing passing trade will impact negatively on those businesses which rely upon it. I am supportive of most of the elements of the scheme. I like the idea of a zebra crossing beside Marlborough lane. However, I am not at all keen on the Corn street bus lane. I don't feel threatened cycling down Corn street, and there are other cycle routes into Witney that already exist, just use them. I would have thought that a cycle route down Welch way would be much easier and less disruptive to implement, to cater for those coming in from north west Witney. I suspect the Corn street bus lane will have little impact on Resident of Witney cycling, but will just increase pressure on other routes as car drivers look for ways round the obstruction. Cars coming in from the north west are currently split between Corn street and Welch way - under this scheme, almost all of them will choose Welch way, putting significant pressure on that road and causing long tailbacks at the Zebra crossing during busy shopping periods like Christmas when lots of people use the crossing one after another after another.

215

Resident of Witney Fix the pot holes

How many people do you cycling in witney....is it justified to cater more for them?... during lockdown you Resident of Witney made it safer for cyclists...dont see more bikes on the road I am very concerned about part 4 of the proposals (Corn St and also Holloway Road) You do not appear to have thought about the effects on the road I live in (Saxon Way, off the Crofts) - we already have far too much traffic and parking in this residential street, along with Orchard Way. Your proposals will only make Resident of Witney this worse, for example drivers finding they can't proceed along Corn St will turn up The Crofts and into Saxon Way, then Orchard Way to get back to Corn St. We have lived here many years and parking in the road is now dominated by people leaving their cars here and working in Corn St or the rest of the town - your proposals will make this worse. I and many neighbours are very concerned that you haven't thought of this. My wife and I are both in our seventies, have health issues and never been able to cycle.Your proposals would have a negative effect on our and many other inhabitants of the area using the town for shopping.This would have an adverse effect on the businesses in town ,which is suffering already with many closures. If Resident of Witney this happens the business rates collected by the council will collapse and Witney would become a ghost town. With these proposed traffic restrictions ,I would ask how would the council attract new business into town? Where to begin.

Don't drop kerbs, instead use dutch entrance kerbs to build UP the links across roads acting as a speed bump, but a better mobility experience.

Add parallels crossings to the 5 ways intersection.

Resident of Witney Don't widen pavement for shared space, it has failed in the Slade in Headington already. Take space from the road for dedicated cycle lanes from the road, fit armadillos or bendy bollards if a kerb is too expensive. I'm sure armadillos of bollards are cheaper than the civil engineering also; more bang for buck.

Corn street build outs must stay to control speed. Instead of putting cycle lane around build outs, create cycle lane through the build outs. The cycle lane on corn street must be mandatory, not advisory (or it's pointless). Add armadillos or bollards (or even plant trees creating a boulevard) full length. 216

Remove chicanes from all cycle routes immediately, instead calm the road adjacent.

Where to begin.

Don't drop kerbs, instead use dutch entrance kerbs to build UP the links across roads acting as a speed bump, but a better mobility experience.

Add parallels crossings to the 5 ways intersection.

Don't widen pavement for shared space, it has failed in the Slade in Headington already. Take space from the road for dedicated cycle lanes from the road, fit armadillos or bendy bollards if a kerb is too expensive. I'm sure armadillos of bollards are cheaper than the civil engineering also; more bang for buck.

Remove chicanes from all cycle routes immediately, instead calm the road adjacent.

I've no market square concerns on this plan, but the pavements must be permitted to become extensions of stores and hospitality long term. Take some of the old parking spaces for additional cycle parking more centrally. Move remaining car parkin and taxi spaces out by 1.5 metres and have cycles go up that space created as a lane perhaps?

Langdale gate was always a cycle route bygone. Again create one way system around Corn St, Witan Way and Welsh way, keeping High St closed as a first step to town wide one way system. That creates more space at Langdale gate for mandatory and segregated cycle lane. Advisory lanes are the very think in which I have been knocked off my bike twice!

Church Lane - carriageway patching is not Active Travel - it's the councils job. Again it needs segregation, or mandatory lines. Beyond Oxford hill, where the route is not near cars I have less concerns. Welcome better surfaces, removal of all chicanes and replace with bollards so as not to impede the route for mobility

217

scooters or cargo bikes. Improved lighting is a no brainer, I hope LED and potentially solar, or even cat eyes like seen in the science park routes recently.

Residents and business who have concerns about loss of access will gain more through traffic flow, The town is ONLY 2.6 or so miles wide from Windrush place to Madley. So almost all trips for those able can be done by bike, creating road space for deliveries without delay or those with mobility issues to drive or scoot in more freely.

I do wish there was more ambition here. Appreciate money is tight on the budget - but do less - do it brilliants to Dutch standards then work on that standard outward on any occasion a road is being redone.

I fear much of this will be a waste of money as it either fails to address concerns mingling with traffic for bikes, or may increase fears from pedestrians over blurring the line between cycling on pavement vs shared spaces.

I support the proposals, but I would rather you reject them and for example changed 5 Ways into a Dutch roundabout for example and them connect the network every time you undertake road works with on road, segregated lanes. These need not be a London standard, simple bollards every 5-7 meters or armadillos.

Do less brilliantly. Don't create a whole route which few will use as it will not achieve any modal shift. And undermine the case for any future, better scheme as motorists will point and say this was a waste, why waste more.

[B. Support]

AS someone who drives, rides a motorcycle, cycles and walks, this scheme seems logical and relevant to residents. I stopped cycling to work because Corn Street was too dangerous (too many drivers don't Resident of Witney understand rights of way). It would be really good if all the cycle lanes in Witney could be joined up - at present there are lots of gaps between them, either forcing cyclists onto roads or pavements and creating conflict with drivers and pedestrians.

218

It’s a brilliant scheme and personally will make my commute easier and safer. I bike virtually the whole route from madley park to deer park every week day for work. The only thing I think that could be improved in the plan is the cycle/walk path through Langhall. It is a very popular walking and cycling route. If your walking and someone is coming the other way you Resident of Witney have to go onto the cycle path (especially now to keep distance) and the same for cycling. I think the path here would benefit from being widened. Plus when cycling down the hill from the leisure centre you can’t see very far in front of you and since people can be on the cycle path this can be particularly dangerous so maybe something can be done here?

Resident from I support more cycling and walking provision in the town and would like to see this sort of scheme cross the surrounding area town in the other direction too.

Any cycle improvements are welcome. My desire would be for me to cycle from my home in Madley to the other side of Witney on a cycle route. If that was the case, I would think about buying a new bike. If not I Resident of Witney don't think it would change my behaviour, as I already walk into town. Could be really helpful for other people though. Cycling prevision is often done in a half measure and isn't quite done well enough in the England..

Any upgrade in the cycling infrastructure is welcomed to separate cyclist from cars, also the 20mph Resident of Witney restriction for motor vehicles would also be welcomed. As I use most of the link paths from estates to estates for work and pleasure it would be great to formalise them into a recognised link also to the new estates for workers and school goers. Resident from As already declared, the Corn Street proposal will reduce traffic entering Market Square and travelling north surrounding area along the High Street. It provides an opportunity to permanently pedestrianize the High Street. Resident from surrounding area I strongly support the Witney Active Travel Scheme.

219

Resident of Witney Less cars ... better for personal and others health. Safer and environmentally better.

Resident of Witney Think this idea is very good and being visually impaired I want to ride my bike but don’t feel safe enough on the roads because of my eye sight so will give me more confidence think it’ll be good.

I fully support this plan as I currently cycle less than I would like to because it is difficult to get across town safely. For example, if I am able to cycle from my home on Madley Park all the way across town to the top of Tower Hill safely then I will be able to cycle to the Park Run on a Saturday morning, when it finally restarts. I currently have to drive. Resident of Witney

I'm particularly keen for the unmade track leading from Woodbank to Park View Court to be upgraded to a shared pathway with lighting - I use this every day and it is muddy, bumpy, dark at night and occasionally dangerous when cyclists and pedestrians get in each other's way (I use it as both a pedestrian and a cyclist).

Resident of Witney The new cycle plans will be great for us to bike as a family and for biking to school instead of going in the car. Much safer for my son

I think it would be extremely positive move for all local residents ref traffic but more importantly fitness and Resident of Witney health

This scheme is a great idea. It will take some time for people to work out the new routes around the one-way Resident of Witney system, so please delay any assessments of effects on local retail or businesses until the changes have had a chance to bed in.

Resident of Witney Any improvements to make life easier for cyclists has my thorough approval

220

Great ideas for improvements and looking forward to seeing them happen, thank you! One thing that hasn't been covered, that I think would be beneficial, is making the path the connects the town centre with Langel a Resident of Witney designated shared use path. I'd also like to see the kerbside and island on the way to Langel (away from town centre) lower and easier to cross for cyclists; maybe also a wider island to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists at the same time.

Resident of Witney Great idea - there will be plenty who moan about it but it’s better for the environment.

Thank you for these exciting proposals. I'm looking forward to seeing them installed!

A few things not covered, that I think would be worth considering, include:

Resident of Witney - making the path from town towards Langel a designated shared use path

- lowering the kerbs at the crossing (including the island) from the path from town towards Langel and widening the island to make more space for pedestrians and cyclists

- tarmaccing the desire line above the subway on Ducklington Lane (making cycling easier)

Can you do the same for Carterton please and and slow down the traffic on Monahan way as they go far to Resident of surrounding fast. area

The scheme is excellent and very much welcomed. I'm not clear why you are giving so much time to "residents who will be impacted". Far too many will simply object and get in the way of progress. What Tourist/ visitor to the Witney needs are talented designers and engineers to create excellent cycle infrastructure. Simply copying area the Dutch style roundabout design rather than trying to badly reinvent the wheel would be welcomed. Until then, Witney will continue to have traffic problems leading to the kind of air pollution which kills thousands of people in the UK every year. There is a silent majority of people who are supportive of the proposals and if you build it they will use it, as has been evidenced by the massive use of local footpaths and cycle networks 221

through the pandemic. If you try to walk any unpaved routes they are completely chewed up and destroyed, which is only to be welcomed and demonstrates their use. The evidence and support is out there if you have the appetite.

Cycle/walking lanes are great for slower cycling/children. Please also ensure edge of road surfaces are smooth and lanes clearly give priority to road cyclists. Poor surfaces, uneven iron-work etc means cycling is Resident from not a pleasure with cyclists forced to dodge and move further into the road. Traffic lights to have cycle boxes surrounding area at the front. Adequate lighting is important but limited to where necessary; ensure balance reducing light pollution and power consumption.

Resident of Witney Please widen existing cycle paths, or build cycle paths on both sides of the roads with barriers between the road and cycle path

It’s a great idea. We are a community, especially aware of our neighbours and local area as a place to walk Resident of Witney in since lockdown. We are more connected now, and coming out of lockdown into an environment that lets us walk and cycle, stop and chat and feel connected will be brilliant.

As long as we maintain enough free parking, I'd like to see some pedestrian only areas in Witney.

Pretty much every town and city in this country has been built for cars, not for people, and the more we can do to change that without inconveniencing visitors and shoppers, the more pleasant Witney will be for all. (But...... please don't go down the park-and-ride route - can't really justify it, but I don't like them and Resident of Witney never use them)

Finally, could I suggest that the move to electric and self driving vehicles should always be taken into account when making these changes. Clearly the former will be here before the latter, so charging points will need to become the norm in parking areas, but the latter re-writes our relationships with cars completely and it would be sensible not to make decisions now that could not be extended/evolved/re-purposed as the type of vehicles and vehicle usage changes.

222

West bound only cars at corn street great idea. Means no cars ignoring the priority and squeezing cyclists which is so dangerous and I have experienced this multiple times! This will additionally reduce the amount of cars going through town. Really market sq, corn street should be buses/taxis/deliveries with Witan way, Welch way, going around the town centre. This promotes a) Walking & cycling to town because it’s both safer and possibly easier than driving the whole way round b) Makes the town centre and market safer, quieter, more inviting and promotes an afternoon out

I can’t comment on the Holloway Road details.

Tower Hill will need an up cycle lane, it’s quite easy to roll down the hill and feel safe but going up the hill and feel safe that’s the hard part especially for new or casual cyclists. Resident of Witney My main comment is that painted on cycle lanes on small roads are often ignored/can’t even be listened too by cars as the road is too small. As a cyclist and driver it’s a really hard area because you can’t fit car and bike safely so if painted ones are to go on then something will need to be done with parking/width on corn street.

LOTS of signage as a cyclist I didn’t even know half the routes existed, I cycle on the road very happily but if I take friends I know they feel safer on proper routes but these aren’t always clear.

All in all good plans, especially given the future environmental targets anything extra to promote green ways of travelling.

Many Thanks

The overall aim is a real positive for the town and residents, and should be driven through urgently ... I like the consultation but sometimes you have to make difficult decisions. Resident of Witney Why not make Tower Hill one-way up and Woodford Way one-way down, and increase the space for cyclists and predestination ... be radical, make a difference! High Street through town needs automatic bollards to restrict cars & vans ... they are dangerous for pedestrians and cause confusion in a restricted area.

223

The proposed changes will hopefully discourage car dependency and therefore make Witney a much more Resident of Witney pleasant and healthy environment for people.

I think that it will have a positive effect as it provides more opportunities for people to cycle and walk. You just need to really do something about Bridge Street as this is really dangerous for cyclists. As a cyclist I Resident of Witney have been clipped by cars twice and if you cycle on the paths it is safer, but you get shouted at by pedestrians or worse still a fine from a policeman. If you are sensible like me and try and push you bike on the path then their is no room for all three.

I support these proposals overall but would add a proposal that the high street is also made one way Resident of Witney towards church green to aid the flow along high street and up corn street.

The proposed changes to the paths between Woodbank and Newland and between Woodbank and Resident of Witney Woodstock Road will improve my experience of waking to/from the town centre.

Resident of Witney This is a great idea for Witney, I hope it’s a start of a larger scheme for more cycle routes to get around/ through the town

Since we have been resident on Corn St, we have noticed an increase in both vehicular activity and speeding by private cars as well as Taxis & mini-cabs. We have both had our own private cars written off by dangerous drivers along Corn St. There is currently very little police presence in the town centre or along Resident of Witney Corn St for anti-social behaviour including speeding and very noisy vehicles. The prioritising of safe, sustainable & environmentally friendly transport as well as a 20 mph speed limit, will help to reduce the expectation and behaviour that Corn St is a “race track”.

Resident of Witney Safety is the number 1 reason why i dont currently cycle. having dedicated cycle space will mean i will get on the bike much more often

Resident of Witney As a resident living in church lane, I welcome the 20mp speed limit, Also exiting meadow view can be difficult if cars are parked either side, so road markings would make 224

cycling and walking safer,

AFTER WATCHING THE TRAFFIC OUTSIDE OUR SHOP FOR OVER 20YEARS, REMOVAL OF Business owner EXISTING BUILD-OUTS [EAST BOUND] WOULD SOLVE MOST PROBLEMS IN UPPER CORN STREET

I welcome these long awaited changes to enhance the town and hopefully it will remove some of the cyclists Resident of Witney from the path in Corn st. I do however think a joint approach on making the cycle paths clear of brambles and overgrown hedging is also needed. These have been poorly maintained for too long.

My children are keen to cycle more within and around Witney, but I’m concerned for their safety as many roads are currently unsafe for learner cyclists. Any scheme which enables safer cycling will be especially Resident of Witney beneficial to the the younger generation who are unlikely to be answering this survey. I’m also a carer for my mother and son who both have disabilities (with a blue badge) so it’s important that I am able to drive and park close to shops, GP, chemists etc.

Resident of Witney I THINK THE 20MPH LIMIT ON CHURCH LANE IS ESSENTIAL WITH PEDESTRIANS WALKING TO/FROM THE BLAKE SCHOOL, COGGES PRE-SCHOOL AND THE TOWN CENTRE.

Resident of Witney I think it is a great idea and of its time right now......

Many good things already in Witney to enable interesting walks. Madley paths are wide enough for SD Resident from mostly. Main path from bus stop to Madley needs to be safer for evening workers returning and winter surrounding area months. 20 mph limits are a very welcome suggestion in identified parts. WODC to consider better signing or mapping of pathways for recreational walking?

I’m all for cycle lanes but I’d attach one caveat. Most of the cycle lanes we currently have aren’t fit for Resident of Witney purpose. For example, the path alongside Station Lane gives way to every side road, lamppost and crossing rather than having a right of way alongside the road it follows. This leads to many cyclists not using it. If we 225

wish to have great cycle paths then we need to look at the places were there is best practice (Netherlands etc). I’d rather have fewer, but better, cycle lanes than wasted money Overall I’m really pleased that we’re trying to limit the traffic, and pollution, through the centre of town.

Resident from Improving safety and convenience for cycling (and making car use for short journeys less convenient) is the surrounding area best way to make sustainable use of the limit space available for transport routes

Resident of Witney I think all the proposals are great, having better access to cycling/walking routes will definitely encourage me to travel actively. I support 20mph in terms of helping road safety and for air quality.

Provided there are loading and unloading times for businesses on Corn Street, I think this is a great idea to Resident of Witney create more of a Witney circular.

I'm pleased to see the changes you are planning and hope they go well.

Once Holloway road is closed to through traffic, I shall have to detour via the 5 ways roundabout and Welch Resident of Witney Way to get to the Wood Green side of town when driving out of the area. This will increase my mileage slightly, but the air pollution in the Corn Street area where I live, should be slightly lower due to a decrease in eastbound traffic, which is why I have ticked the neutral boxes.

Resident from surrounding area We walk to the shops now as we live at Applegarth Court. Nothing would change in that respect for us.

I am delighted to see the proposal to erect bollards at the Woodstock road access to the lane linking with Woodbank. I live opposite the Woodbank end of the lane.This former road is certainly heavily used by walkers and some cyclists. HOWEVER, it is frequently also used by a range of vehicles - white vans, private Resident of Witney cars, goods vehicles which follow sat navs only to reach the bollards at the Woodbank end. Often they lack reversing skills and attempt a multi point turn causing damage to my neighbour's private hedge. Bollards preventing them entering the lane would solve the problem and save a lot of frayed tempers all round. Thank you.

226

Resident from I’m very supportive in principle. I live 3 miles out of Witney so need to drive to get there. When there, the surrounding area town is small enough to walk round and I will do this even more with this new scheme.

A subsidy/partnership with local bike sellers e.g. The Windrush Bike Project to offer residence a discount on Resident of Witney purchase or maintainence for 6 months leading up to the start of the proposal so as we can be prepared for the changes would be useful. The scheme is excellent & much needed. The upgrades will be a great bonus. My concern is that several pinch points are not currently fit for purpose & it is not clear that these will be addressed: Resident of Witney 1. Bridges over Windrush on Langel Common need widening to allow free flow of cycles AND small children to be able to feed the ducks on both sides 2. First section of Path from Oxford Hill towards Madley Park needs significant widening. 3. First bridge over Madley Brook needs redesigning to reduce sharp bends for the safety of all users

Specific comments on the proposed route improvements from Oxford Hill to Madley Park ITEM 11: Oxford Hill path junction (Madley Park side) Access to the path is very narrow due to a large hedge. Only allows one person at a time to use, particularly with social distancing. Could this be widened. We also need fingerpost signs either side of the road at the Oxford Hill junction showing walking and cycling times to Madley Park and Witney Town Centre ITEM 13: Unmade path from Park View Court to Woodbank. Madley Park Residents Association has been campaigning for several years for this section of unmade track to be surfaced and lit. It is the last remaining Representative from a unsurfaced section of an attractive level walking and cycling route from Madley Park to Witney Town centre group or organisation which takes 25-30 minutes. It is a very well used path for people walking to and from from Town as well as those walking to the the bus stop on Oxford Hill and schoolchildren walking to and from Woodgreen and Madley Brook schools. The route is uneven at present, can be muddy and feels unsafe and a hazardous in the dark. ITEM 14: Woodbank to Footbridge. The concrete bridge, possibly constructed at the time of the sites development, is unsafe. It has no side parapets or anything to indicate it is a bridge with a drop to the brook below. Rails needs to be installed either side and the route surfaced to connect the end of Woodbank/the current dirt track through to Madley Brook Lane

227

FINGER POST SIGNS. Madley Park Residents Association is keen to further promote to its residents walking and cycling into Witney Town centre. The route however is not always clear. Finger posts signs showing walking and cycling times are needed at the following locations: 1. At the entrance to the path next to Madley Park Co op (by the hedge) 2. At the entrance to the path from Oxford Hill which is very narrow 3. At the path junction from Church lane to Oxford Hill 4. At the start of the path in Witney Town centre on the Witan way roundabout next to the electricity grid station.

Resident of Witney BETTER ACCESS TO AND FROM THE TOWN TO ENABLE LONGER JOURNEYS FOR LIESURE

5-ways roundabout is dangerous. A car almost collided with me once at speed while I was cycling on it: they just didn't look for me and maneouvered onto and headed straight at me, a very scary experience.

A car has also collided with me on the mini roundabout by the Buttercross and knocked me to the ground Resident of Witney with minor injuries, luckily not at high speed.

There's usually always a line of illegally parked cars outside the kebab shops which exacerbates traffic issues on Corn Street. It would be good to see some incisive action to stop this.

Please do what you can to keep Witney residents safe and healthy.

I believe that regardless of whether all of us take up more cycling initially, implementing more cycle priority can only be positive, creating slower, quieter, fresher zones for mental health, physical health. Also more pleasurable shopping experiences and please also consider more alfresco dining in car free zones? Even if uptake is slow initially there has to be an increased effort and desire on all our parts to do more for the Resident of Witney environment, and more for ourselves. Our safety in travel will benefit, our physical health will benefit, mental health. I believe a central hub or zone that is more pedestrianised will benefit from a stronger community, diversity, encourage more street interactions, street food, music, entertainment, there would undoubtedly be more flexibility and opportunity with the spaces enclosed in the plans to offer more... And get more. With all this taken into consideration I strongly believe that businesses old and new could thrive as more people 228

would be inclined and encouraged to make a slower approach in and around the centre, engage more and spend more. As I have this opportunity please also consider more recycling bins around the centre. We have lots of savvi, environmentally conscious eateries in Witney centre and generally waste is becoming easier to recycle. Emphasis on this will no doubt increase on the back of the environmental upturn of the covid crisis, and you can feel now a real drive from all countries to do more to work towards a greener more sustainable future. As I am sure you will, please do consider carefully the plans sustainability, as a temporary change would be costly and potentially detramental to the area. I do sincerely hope these plans are viable and the majority are keen and look forward to their implementation.

I whole heartedly support the aim of the scheme. I am not totally sure that the measured proposed will have the desired impact but they are in step in the right direction. i am concerned that the 5 ways roundabout is currently quite dangerous and i am not sure that the proposals will improve it enough. i support the slowing of motor traffic around this roundabout and also constraining road space for motor traffic to achieve this. better signage for motor traffic will hopefully stop car drivers swerving as they look for signage or where they Resident of Witney need to turn. a dedicated and segregated cycle lane around the roundabout from tower hill to corn street would probably work better than the shared footpath/cycle path proposed and stop people cycling onto the road when they get to corn street. a dual purpose crossing without a central refuge could work better for the crossings close to this roundabout too. i do think that lighting, surfacing and bends in cycle paths are important and especially around Madley park improvements can be made. the crossing on oxford hill does need improvement and again i am not sure that the proposed toucan cross will offer the level of improvement needed to stimulate increased usage.

The toucan crossing in Oxford Hill will make it safer for myself and my children to get around. I like that idea. Resident of Witney I appreciate that the 20 mph plan for the centre of Witney is also a good idea. Although it will annoy other drivers I don't drive in town so it won't affect me except to make it safer to cross the road. I also think with this pandemic as a test we could also make the high street permanently car free and for buses only.

Is there any chance that with the closure of Debenhams that a pathway could link up with Waterloo Walk in Resident of Witney the High Street as this would be an amazing link up for the town and would breathe life into Waterloo Walk and the High Street

Resident of Witney I am supportive of more lighting on the dirt track between Newland and Madley Park but would want to see low level lighting to prevent harm to wildlife and to the general appearance of the area which has become 229

very verdant as the trees have grown. I have cycled on the recently completed path between Abingdon and Sutton Courtenay and I would want to see the same lighting system (small discs on the ground) and same surface used to parent the path having an over engineered appearance.

I am supportive of making Corn Street one way to normal traffic and blocking up Holloway Road. I would also support making the eastbound route access only ie preventing all but buses and cycles going between Corn Street and Market Square in either direction.

I don’t normally respond to these types of consultations but I imagine you will receive a lot of unfounded objections saying that this will affect businesses in the town centre when I think increasing cycling and walking will actually benefit the town centre. Please don’t water down the plans due to a vocal minority of people wedded to their cars.

I am broadly in favour of the proposals but have the following comments and concerns:

There will still be many necessary car journeys from the Five Ways roundabout to the many businesses at and around the top of Corn Street. There is nothing in the plan to indicate what action drivers should take if they make that journey, find themselves blocked off from Corn Street and Holloway Road, and have no parking space. Where and how do they turn back?

There is nothing in the plan to alleviate the access problems with right turning traffic entering and exiting the essential Waitrose/Langdale Court car parks from Witan Way. These access points need to be redesigned Resident of Witney to allow for better traffic flow.

There will be a significant increase in vehicles using the traffic lights at the junction of High Street and Witan Way as a result of the eastbound closure of Corn Street to residents from the western side who will no longer be able to use Langdale Gate. If they then approach the Waitrose/Langdale Gate car parks from this direction this will cause further congestion when they want to turn right into these car parks.

The plan includes an upgraded crossing at the Oxford Hill / Church Lane junction. This is most welcome. Very many drivers do not stop at the existing crossing when pedestrians are waiting to cross.

Improvements MUST be made for the residents of the 17 households, their visitors, deliveries and

230

tradespeople when exiting Meadow View into Church Lane. These journeys are exclusively left turns out of Meadow View and the drivers' visibility is invariably obstructed by vehicles parked in Church Lane on the left side at the exit point. There are currently no parking restrictions at the junction.

As the plan is to encourage greater use of cycles and walking this MUST be made safer for the targeted road users by the installation of parking restrictions in Church Lane close to the junction such as double yellow lines and signage followed by enforcement. This is a permanent daily problem and on occasions made even worse when events are taking place at Cogges Farm Museum. There are also concerns about this access point for emergency vehicles should an incident occur.

The 20mph Speed Limit proposals are appropriate and are very welcome. They will need to be enforced!

Resident of Witney I'm in favour of safer cycling but would still like to drive along Corn Street.

I am very much in support of more/better cycle lanes as long as they have speed limit advisories. The lanes Resident of Witney on Deer Park get used by dog walkers and social distancers, and sometimes cyclists ride those lanes at around 20mph. Without signposts and limits I think accidents are likely to occur.

I would welcome any scheme which encourages cycling to reduce levels of traffic in the proposed areas. In addition, if it prohibits the use of pavements by cyclists. This is illegal but I have had to regularly walk on the Resident of Witney road to avoid cyclists. This is predominantly children but many adults are guilty of the same. Walking around the Leys especially during ‘lockdown’ has been a nightmare but I completely esrpect the needs of those using mobility chairs. Could the message ‘no cycling’ on pavements be high on your agenda.

I would like to see the inclusion of a 20mph speed limit including rounders on the road from Oxford Hill to Newland to West End Roundabout to reduce motor vehicles to a safe speed making the current very narrow Resident of Witney footpaths where one can only walk in single file in some places and the road more safe for walking. Consideration also needs to be given to creating cycle lanes on this very busy road. Apart from the change to the current crossing at the Oxford Hill/Church Road junction, I am very disappointed that the whole of this road into Witney has been overlooked.

Resident of Witney Please can you consider as soon as possible linking Witney to Carterton via a direct cycle route, mirroring closely the S1 bus route so that it is safe to ride between Carterton and Witney. This would mean that I 231

would cycle every day to work in the summer and reduce the car usage. At the moment it is too dangerous to do that. This is a great start for getting across Witney and tying into the Witney- Oxford cycle routes, just need to push it west to Carterton.

More lighting on the pathways on madley park will make it easier to cycle & walk but safer. The crime and Resident of Witney anti social behaviour on the path at night is high because you cant see down the path.

I both walk and cycle regularly on the section of path from Langdale Gate roundabout to Church Lane and pedestrians pay no heed to the fact that there is an existing cycle lane. The only serious accident I've had on my bicycle in the past five years was as a result of a pedestrian stepping into my path on this stretch of cycle path. The cycle path needs to be painted in a bright colour (green?) to differentiate itself clearly and ideally there would be small posts every six feet or so to clearly mark it off. I'm also unclear about 'on-road advisory cycle lanes' - what does this mean. Is there where a token stencil of a bicycle is sprayed onto the road? Because if so, it makes absolutely no difference to how other road users treat a cyclist. Again, I would recommend a clearly defined lane painted a different colour whenever this is specified and ideally as much as possible this should have small posts separating traffic from cyclists. Where the bus & cycle lane is proposed, these should also be used to stop vehicles crossing to that side of the road and parking facing oncoming buses and cycles. You are also right to review the issue of parking on the double-yellow lines in Langdale Gate. It is not just Resident of Witney Blue Badge holders who ignore the restrictions. If you could install some kind of CCTV camera to capture infringements I think this would quickly stop the problem, although I'm not sure where Blue Badge holders would park. Perhaps you could give them a dedicated parking space or two in Church Green just opposite the Butter Cross as this would be no further to walk than if they parked in Langdale Gate? In summary, I think your proposals are positive, it is just that I am not sure they are bold enough. I understand that you have to balance the needs of cyclists, pedestrians, vehicle drivers and businesses but the only realistic way you are going to persuade people to switch to cycling and walking more is if it is made less convenient to drive vehicles in the centre and so safe to cycle that it is a no-brainer for people to make that choice. Please don't allow a small minority of vocal NIMBYs and inflexible business owners to derail your proposals. It is the right thing to do and we need more of this in Witney, eventually linking up to school locations so that parents are encouraged to walk/cycle with their children rather than driving them to the school gates, as this in my opinion is a significant contributor to the congested roads in Witney at peak times.

232

I am broadly in approval of many of the active travel measures, however, The Corn Street proposals are poorly thought through. I do not believe that a one way system will benefit residents, businesses or tourists.

Resident of Witney Businesses depend on people driving along Corn Street for business and local business leaders have informed me that these proposals need to be considered with them. I support suggestive cycle lanes, but by closing a main through road in a market town could be devastating - for example, Abingdon Town Centre....

All for Holloway not becoming rat run however very inconvenient if need to get to church green and have to Resident of Witney travel via Welsh way then corn street or witan way due to high street being shut also.

I think changes for health and the enviroment completely out weigh any issues with this development of the roads and surrounding areas. Local businesses along each route will need support to ensure this doesn't effect them too greatly and I expect this to come from those facilitating this plan. Taking into consideration the great reduction to the impact on the environment this will have and also the huge positive impact on residents health and wellbeing, have you thought about other modes of transport that could be incorporated to help residents get around? Like escooters? I'm looking forward to using these Resident of Witney in Oxford and if a success escooters should be available in every town and city throughout the UK! Developing the local bus services for the those who really need it? Ensuring if a street is not for cars then it actually isn't for cars! Vehicles still use the high street as a rat race or to pop to the bank, no cameras or those patrolling the high street means it's still being used for vehicles and therefore is still unsafe to residents. Why don't you carry out a plan to its full potential before moving onto another? There is still lots to be done the high street.

Resident of Witney High street should remain to closed traffic

Resident of Witney Its great!

233

Resident of Witney It needs to be extended in some way to enable easier, safer access to the new Lidl.

I would like to see change that would encourage those from 7yrs to 70 yrs to feel confident to ride their bikes Resident of Witney in all parts of Witney.

I am very enthusiastic about the proposed improvements to the footpath between Oxford Hill/Madley Park. I walk this path daily to and from work, often when dark early in the morning or late at night. Improvement of Resident of Witney the surface of the track and lighting would make my journey safer. After rain the track and surfaced path are often impassable, necessitating a significant detour. The improvements would also make me more likely to cycle. Much needed and long overdue.

Anything to make cycling safer particularly when you want to take your toddler with you. I prefer cycle lanes which are separate to vehicles as it feels safer than shared with advisory lanes. We also need a cultural shift Resident of Witney and for people to understand that we shouldn't rely on cars so much ( unless essential), it's not good for our environment, our health or safety. I saw a photograph of Witney back in the 1920's and it was lovely to see people walking and cycling. The streets looked so safe and fume free! Perhaps we should bring back the horse and carriage! ;-) 1) The section of path by Langel Gate should be SHARED USE. It is already used by cyclists and is as wide as the path on Langel Common so width is not a good argument.

2) The 20mph limit should be EXTENDED FOR OXFORD HILL AND BRIDGE STREET. This would likely also help with air quality and promote modal shift.

Councillor Suzanne 3) The footpath should be upgraded for SHARED USE FROM OXFORD HILL TO WOODBANK. This is Bartington, Witney much better than the narrow path a dog-leg over the bridge North and East

4) The paths to MADLEY PARK AND WOOD GREEN MUST BE LIT

Please also put bollards in Mud Lane to prevent parking on the verges.

A very good scheme - thank you! 234

Annex 9: Postcode Map of respondents

235

Annex 10: Financials: Estimated Final Costs & Proposed Funding Plan Witney and Bicester Active Travel Scheme: BUDGET G0 (IBC) G1 (OBC) G2 (FBC) G3 (PC) G4 (FC) (baseline) Final Close THRESHOLD CHANGE Stage 0 n/a n/a n/a Options Appraisal Stage 1 n/a n/a 50,000 Feasibility Design Stage 2 n/a n/a 35,000 Design & Procurement Stage 3 n/a n/a 1,322,940 Delivery / Construction Stage 4 n/a n/a 5,000 Close Out n/a n/a 170,000 Contingency n/a n/a Financial Risk £1,582,940.00 TOTAL

EXPENDITURE G0 – IBC G1 – OBC G2 – G3 - G4 - THRESHOLD CHANGE budget baseline FBC PC Final Close

n/a n/a n/a Previous Years n/a n/a 1,087,500 2020/21 n/a n/a 325,440 2021/22 n/a n/a n/a 2022/23

Financial Risk 170,000 Contingency £1,582,940.00 TOTAL 236

Annex 11: Equality and Climate Impact Assessment

Cherwell District Council and Oxfordshire County Council

Equality and Climate Impact Assessment Witney Active Travel Corridor December 2020

**Please see the guidance note for support with completing this assessment**

Section 1: Summary details Directorate and Service Area Communities

What is being assessed (e.g. Witney Active Travel Corridor LEP funded scheme name of policy, procedure, project, service or proposed service change). Is this a new or existing New infrastructure to support cycling and walking in Witney function or policy?

237

Summary of assessment In response to COVID-19 the Department for Transport (DfT) launched two funding streams for Active Travel. The project being Briefly summarise the policy or assessed has arisen from the second tranche of DfT funding. This will support active travel interventions that will aid community proposed service change. recovery to COVID-19 by supporting businesses, social distancing and general healthy lifestyle choices. Summarise possible impacts. The proposal benefits people of all ages from children and their journeys to school, to commuters and businesses. People with Does the proposal bias, disabilities will also benefit from a removal of barriers to active travel, affording them an equal space on the street. In addition, due discriminate or unfairly to the promotion of active travel for short journeys as opposed to carbon intensive modes, the proposal contributes to Oxfordshire disadvantage individuals or County Council’s ambition of reducing carbon emissions. groups within the community? The proposal does not discriminate or unfairly disadvantage any individual or groups within the community, the aim of the route is (following completion of the to create a place that is accessible and beneficial for all. assessment). Completed By Kim Sutherland, Assistant Transport Planner; Odele Parsons, Principal Transport Planner Authorised By Amrik Manku, Growth Manager Date of Assessment Original 12/2020; revised 15/02/2021.

Section 2: Detail of proposal: Context / Background In response to COVID-19 the DfT launched two funding streams for Active Travel. This project is in response to the Briefly summarise the background second tranche of this funding announced in July 2020. The aim of this funding is to support active travel interventions to the policy or proposed service that will aid the reopening of the economy and social distancing; meaningfully reallocate road space for cyclists; and change, including reasons for any develop both cycling and walking as an attractive alternative mode of travel for short journeys, reducing potential changes from previous versions. overcrowding on public transport in the process. In addition, promoting active travel has many health benefits, including tackling obesity, which is said to increase a person’s risk to the adverse effects of Covid-19.

Proposals The project involves infrastructure measures to create a cross town active travel route between Tower Hill and Madley Explain the detail of the proposals, Park in Witney. Several measures are proposed throughout the route: a co-ordinated network of direction cycling signing including why this has been with travel times; a review of cycle parking facilities and improvement if necessary; monitoring before, during and after decided as the best course of completion of improvements; and a review of traffic signs to redirect vehicles to more appropriate routes. A combination action. of widening paths to create shared use off-road facilities, on-road advisory cycle lanes, widening of traffic islands, reviewing crossing points, surfacing and lighting improvements and 20mph speed limits are used throughout the route also. Suggestions for possible interventions were provided through initial stakeholder engagement between May-June 2020. The location and type of interventions that were ultimately chosen were chosen due to their compliance with the DfT objectives, the available budget and timescales. In conjunction with this, consideration was given to where would have the greatest positive impact on the population, reflecting locations with a high population density and amenities including schools, retail and employment. The Propensity to Cycle Tool and Active Mode Appraisal Tool were also used in identifying the most valuable route. This was supported by analysis of hazard and traffic data.

238

Evidence / Intelligence Consultation: List and explain any data, • A consultation workshop was held with stakeholders in December 2020, to gain their views on the proposals for consultation outcomes, research the project. Their views were then considered by officers and engineers and the design alerted to reflect these findings, feedback from service where appropriate. users and stakeholders etc, that supports your proposals and can • A public consultation took place in January 2021 on the preferred options, taking into consideration the help to inform the judgements you intelligence from the workshop session. make about potential impact on Data: different individuals, communities • Speed surveys were conducted between 8th-15th December to inform the location of the 20mph speed limits or groups and our ability to deliver • MCC traffic flow data analysed for the three major junctions of the scheme route (Five Ways Roundabout, Corn our climate commitments. Street/Market Square/ Langdale Gate and Witan Way) focusing on the proportion of HGVs to determine flows and where safety concerns may arise. Research: Bike Life All cities publication, Inclusive City Cycling, Women: reducing the gender gap, Sustrans, June 2018 provides evidence that ‘most women would like to cycle …most women don’t feel safe and are hesitant to start, or restart cycling”. This research shows that 74% of women would like to see more investment in cycling and that 79% of women favour more protected cycle routes – even if that means less space for other road users. Alternatives considered / Many suggestions were put forward during the initial engagement period and not all of these have been taken forward. rejected The proposals that were selected best met the government objectives, timescale and budget as discussed above. The Summarise any other approaches suggestions that were not included have not been disregarded but added to a long list of schemes that will be reviewed that have been considered in when additional funding sources are available in the future. developing the policy or proposed The original proposals included in the funding bid for cycle lanes protected by wands on the Five Ways and Witan Way service change, and the reasons roundabouts will not be taken forward with this funding because appraisal of these measures has identified they would why these were not adopted. This not meet safety requirements. could include reasons why doing nothing is not an option.

Section 3: Impact Assessment Please indicate for each of the Public Sector Equality Duty ‘protected characteristics’ whether there may be no impact, a positive or negative impact, or a mixture of both. If there is no impact, you do not need to complete the rest of that row. Protected Action owner* Timescale and No Any actions or mitigation to Characteristic Positive Negative Description of Impact (*Job Title, monitoring Impact reduce negative impacts Organisation) arrangements

239

Age Cycle conditions will be Scheme made safer for all, including implementation by for children, meaning that end of May 2021. more will be able to travel Monitoring by bike. The scheme throughout 2021. ☐ ☒ ☐ emphasises safe connections to schools and is complimented by School Streets interventions that benefit children, teenagers and their families. Disability The scheme will improve The proposals to implement Scheme cycle infrastructure to shared-use paths have the implementation by provide routes for cycling for potential to negatively impact end of May 2021. all bike users including upon people with a disability, Monitoring those with specially adapted such as those a sight throughout 2021 bikes. Mobility Scooter impairment. Where we are including of users will also be implementing shared accident statistics. considered in the scheme pedestrian and cycle paths, design to ensure that are the impact on pedestrians with not adversely impacted. a sight impairment is being ☐ ☒ ☒ managed through adherence to the Department for Transport’s Cycle Infrastructure Design Local Transport Note 1/20 (July 2020) design guidance, which states where route traffic is up to 300 pedestrians and 300 cyclists per hour the path width should be a minimum of 3.0m. Gender Reassignment ☒ ☐ ☐ Marriage & Civil ☒ ☐ ☐ Partnership Pregnancy & ☒ ☐ ☐ Maternity Race ☒ ☐ ☐ Sex ☐ ☒ ☐ There is evidence that 240

women don’t feel safe and are hesitant to start or restart cycling the aim of the proposed cycle infrastructure is to provide safe attractive routes for everyone to use and to enable a greater take up of cycling irrespective of sex. Sexual ☒ ☐ ☐ Orientation Religion or Belief ☒ ☐ ☐

Additional No Action owner Timescale and impacts Im Any actions or mitigation to Positive Negative Description of impact (*Job Title, monitoring pa reduce negative impacts Organisation) arrangements ct Additional community impacts Rural ☒ ☐ ☐ communities Armed Forces ☒ ☐ ☐ Carers ☒ ☐ ☐ Areas of Witney Central and South have deprivation been identified as areas where income deprivation and income deprivation affecting children are significantly worse than in Oxfordshire or England (Oxfordshire Insight 2020). In addition, all wards of Witney apart ☐ ☒ ☐ from Witney West include areas that are within the 10% most deprived in West Oxfordshire (Oxfordshire Insight 2020). The route provides an enhanced, accessible and free connection between these areas and local amenities including employment, meaning that people in deprived 241

areas are not isolated due to lack of accessibility and producing an environment that may be attractive to further investment from businesses, thereby helping to reduce deprivation. Wider impacts Staff ☒ ☐ ☐ Other Council ☒ ☐ ☐ Services Providers ☒ ☐ ☐ Social Value 1 The route will increase the connectivity of the community by improving the accessibility of retail, leisure and employment facilities. The route will also enhance the ☐ ☒ ☐ quality of the built environment. Improved lighting along the route will help to discourage anti-social behaviour. A more pleasant street scene will be created for all users.

Climate No Action owner Timescale and Positiv Negativ Any actions or mitigation to change Impac Description of impact (*Job Title, monitoring e e reduce negative impacts impacts t Organisation) arrangements OCC and CDC aim to be carbon neutral by 2030. How will your proposal affect our ability to reduce carbon emissions related to: Energy use in The route facilitates a modal our buildings shift to active travel for short or highways journeys by creating an attractive environment for walking and cycling and raising ☐ ☒ ☐ awareness of these modes. Increased uptake of active travel will reduce unnecessary car trips and carbon emissions.

1 If the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 applies to this proposal, please summarise here how you have considered how the contract might improve the economic, social, and environmental well-being of the relevant area 242

Our fleet ☒ ☐ ☐ Staff travel The increased attractiveness and convenience of active travel in Witney places it as a ☐ ☒ ☐ realistic alternative to the car potentially for some work journeys. Purchased services and products ☒ ☐ ☐ (including construction) Maintained The increased attractiveness schools and convenience of active ☐ ☒ ☐ travel in Witney places it as a realistic alternative to the car for journeys to school. We are also committed to enable Oxfordshire to become carbon neutral by 2050. How will your proposal affect our ability to: Enable carbon The route facilitates a modal emissions shift to active travel for short reduction at journeys by creating an district/county attractive environment for level? walking and cycling and raising ☐ ☒ ☐ awareness of these modes. Increased uptake of active travel will reduce unnecessary car trips and carbon emissions.

Section 4: Review Where bias, negative impact or disadvantage is identified, the proposal and/or implementation can be adapted or changed; meaning there is a need for regular review. This review may also be needed to reflect additional data and evidence for a fuller assessment (proportionate to the decision in question). Please state the agreed review timescale for the identified impacts of the policy implementation or service change. Review Date 01 June 2021

243

Person Responsible for Odele Parsons, Principal Transport Planner Review Authorised By Amrik Manku, Growth Manager

244