Oughtibridge paper mill development.

[Cyclone]

Not the bit where I live. (Park, junction with Leppings Lane) that snarls up when there are fifty cars every five minutes, usually following a tram.

 

It'd be very interesting to see a full assessment of traffic load on the roads around here, Holme Lane, Middlewood Road, Catchbar Lane, Leppings Lane, Wadsley Road. The junction(s) as designed around the school are not coping too well as it is.

PS - I am not against the development as such and I do think a case could be made for an extra 200 cars, but if we are talking about 600... We shall see I suppose!

 

50 cars every 5 minutes is how many in an hour?

So what % difference would another 200 make, even IF they all headed into town, and none stopped at the park and ride or took the supertram link bus?

[semerpus]

What % would another 200 cars make???

 

The road is already solid, crawling or often stationary traffic from just past stockarth lane all the way to penistone road in the morning peak

The link buses get caught up in this and therefore fail to connect with trams

The only 'improvement ' proposed by the developers is changes to the access road to the site and 2 bus shelters!

There is enough grass verge and lay bys just past the ambulance station until the park and ride at middle wood and the developers should be forced to fund a bus lane.

 

And yes I've already lodged an objection with the council, my mp and the parish council

[Mad Hatter]

Looks like it's time to revive that proposal to build a bridge across the Don at Limestone Cottages, linking into the Abbey Forge Road

[Justin Smith]

Not the bit where I live. (Park, junction with Leppings Lane) that snarls up when there are fifty cars every five minutes, usually following a tram.

 

It'd be very interesting to see a full assessment of traffic load on the roads around here, Holme Lane, Middlewood Road, Catchbar Lane, Leppings Lane, Wadsley Road. The junction(s) as designed around the school are not coping too well as it is.

PS - I am not against the development as such and I do think a case could be made for an extra 200 cars, but if we are talking about 600... We shall see I suppose!

 

In my experience, at busy times when roads are at capacity, it doesn`t take much extra traffic to cause major problems.

[Cyclone]

Well, that's it then, no more house building, because roads are busy everywhere.

Don't worry about the housing shortage, the convenience of people who already live near a road is more important.

[the fonz]

To refuse a development on traffic grounds the impact has to be 'Severe' according to NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework)

 

If there are queues already and the developed is adding onto that is that severe?

[semerpus]

Well, that's it then, no more house building, because roads are busy everywhere.

Don't worry about the housing shortage, the convenience of people who already live near a road is more important.

 

Er did i say that ? No

 

I actually welcome the building of the new houses and the development of the site however there has to be proper infrastructure and roads included in the plan. The A6102 is a busy road single file in either direction.

 

Roads may be busy everywhere however that doesn't mean we should just suck it up!

 

Proper planning, new connecting roads, bus lanes that means public transport is viable and will connect with what it's supposed to and run to time rather than be stuck in traffic are all things to be considered.

 

Theres proposals for an addtional 1,000 houses at Stocksbridge/Deepcar too in pipeline

 

Interestingly the developers say Oughtibridge surgery has capacity to handle patients from 300 new houses however when i called last week there were no bookable appointments for over a week and a half..then people got to A&E and clog that up ..

 

according to Yorkshire Water the sewerage plant doesn't have sufficient capacity either!

 

Build them but build sufficient infrastructure to cope

[geared]

The proposal for the factory site would apppear to be as a factory or longer term as mixed housing / small industrial units.

 

I thought they wanted to try and retain the factory, IMO any planning permissions should be in the first instance flattening that and building on the factory site first.

 

Build there before on the meadow or nearby playing field.

[tzijlstra]

I thought they wanted to try and retain the factory, IMO any planning permissions should be in the first instance flattening that and building on the factory site first.

 

Build there before on the meadow or nearby playing field.

 

It could be that they need to release capital before they can clear the factory. But obviously it would be better if they started with the factory.

[geared]

It could be that they need to release capital before they can clear the factory. But obviously it would be better if they started with the factory.

 

Very true, but the developers funding shouldn't influence planning decisions.

 

You'd run the very real risk of them throwing up all the houses on the green belt and then claiming the project had run out of money and them doing a runner before touching the factory/warehouse.