Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council - Unitary Development Plan 2006

Back to contents  -  Back to UDP home page

Chapter 18

ACCESSIBILITY

18.1The Rochdale UDP aims to facilitate accessibility for all by integrating land use development and transport, reducing the need to travel and promoting choice in the availability of transport including walking, cycling and public transport. This is to be done by shaping the pattern of development and influencing the location, scale, density, design and mix of land uses, and by ensuring that the necessary transport infrastructure is provided and managed to facilitate new development.

18.2The policies in this chapter have been prepared in accordance with the broad objectives and principles of the current Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan, and allow the key land use elements of the LTP strategy to be implemented in the Borough. Other policies in the LTP not relating to land use issues will be covered by other strategies/programmes and other agencies.

18.3Cars in particular have changed the way we live, bringing great flexibility and widening horizons. As a result the length and number of motorised journeys has risen massively and is projected to increase further still. New and wider roads have been built to accommodate this growth but there is still congestion and demands for more roads. Emissions of carbon dioxide from road transport are the fastest growing contributor to climate change and in Greater Manchester those areas that will have air pollution levels that will not meet national health based standards in 2005 include areas closely related to main traffic routes.

18.4Accordingly we need to reduce the growth in the length and number of motorised journeys, promote travel choice and reduce reliance on the private car. The promotion of walking, cycling and public transport will have all-round benefits for the economy, the environment, public health and quality of life. Although the transport of goods will remain heavily road dependent, it is important to facilitate the movement of goods by rail where it would or could be practicable.

18.5A further benefit is that fewer cars on the road will lead to less congestion for travel that is essential by road. Access for goods is, and will remain, heavily dependent on road transport and access by car will continue to be essential to the economic viability of most developments. There is therefore a need to design and manage access by motor vehicles in order to minimise the potential adverse impacts on the wider community and the environment. Depending on the scale and location, relevant factors could include noise, vibration, fumes, road safety, community safety, physical impact and barriers to access.

18.6Despite the increase in car use, walking remains the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly those under 2 kilometres. It also forms a significant part of all longer journeys by public transport and car.

18.7Cycling also has the potential to replace short car trips, particularly those under 5 kilometres, and to form part of longer journeys by public transport.

18.8Public transport offers significant potential to substitute for car trips to local, district and town centres, particularly if development that will attract large numbers of people is concentrated in such centres or in other locations well served by public transport.

18.9A significant part of the borough is rural and it is important that wherever possible people living in these areas have access to facilities and services by means other than the private car. The Council, in partnership with other bodies including GMPTE, will seek to ensure this through, for example, participating in initiatives such as Rural Bus Challenge and supporting other community transport schemes; a number of which may cross the borough boundary.

18.10Equality of access for disabled people is an essential component of an inclusive society. Nearly one-fifth of the population has a permanent impairment and a high proportion of people with a permanent impairment are elderly. Improved access also benefits people with toddlers; people pushing a pram or pushchair; women who are heavily pregnant; people who are carrying shopping or luggage; people who are mobility restricted temporarily by illness or injury; and elderly people.

18.11PPG 13 ‘Transport’ states that development should reflect the need to travel by means other than the car. This policy is intended to ensure that development designs take account at the outset, the need to encourage safe travel by sustainable forms of transport. This hierarchy means that the needs of pedestrians and disabled people will be considered first and so on down the hierarchy until all of the accessibility requirements for the development or highway works have been considered. The underlying aim is to ensure that the needs of more vulnerable road users, including pedestrians, disabled people, cyclists and users of public transport, are given careful consideration in the planning of new developments and highway works. This will serve to foster social inclusion and promote more environmentally sustainable forms of transport.

18.12Taxis and private hire vehicles provide access to a car on those occasions when it is most needed for people who do not otherwise have access, because of cost and/or choice. They are also used intensively and can reduce the need for car parking in central and other commercial areas. Local access for lorries and vans is essential to the economic viability of businesses and needs to be accommodated. Hence, in the hierarchy, both are considered before the needs of general traffic.

18.13Motorcycles vary considerably in terms of engine size and resultant environmental and social impact and there are no reasonable means to distinguish between different engine sizes in the hierarchy. Accordingly, motorcycles are ranked with cars and commercial as 'general traffic'.

18.14Peak traffic levels are usually high with increased congestion and air pollution and a high proportion of sole occupancy car trips to and from work. It is widely accepted that, for economic, social and environmental reasons, the volume of traffic at peak times needs to be reduced through improving and promoting alternatives to single occupancy car use, including walking, cycling, public transport and car sharing. Off-peak general traffic is therefore ranked before peak time traffic because it includes a higher proportion of shopping journeys essential to the vitality and viability of town centres. Traffic levels are also lower and more easily accommodated without unduly compromising the needs of other road users and/or impacting on local communities.

18.15Safe and convenient access for pedestrians, disabled people and other people with restricted mobility is an important element in addressing issues of equality and inclusion, and helps increase safety of movement by reducing conflict between pedestrians and motor vehicles. It also helps to reduce the number of car journeys made, reducing congestion and pollution levels, in addition to being beneficial to personal health.

18.16People with restricted mobility include elderly people, pregnant women, young children and those with prams and pushchairs. Easier mobility enables people to be more independent and to enjoy a range of activities otherwise barred to them by lack of access.

18.17If people are to be encouraged to walk and people who do walk are not to be disadvantaged, walking routes must be direct, wide, visible, well lit, free from hazard and obstruction and signed where appropriate.

18.18Nearby facilities and destinations will include nearby shops and centres, bus or tram stops and rail stations and could include schools, community facilities and other uses. Access points should be located where walking distances to such facilities are as short as possible within the reasonable requirements of the development.

18.19Existing rights of way should be maintained or improved. New routes should ideally not be hidden from view to the side or rear of properties as this increases the risk of personal attack and crime against property. However, in order to achieve routes for the wider benefit of the community, this may not always be possible.

18.20Pedestrian routes should not be narrow and enclosed for security reasons, and a suitably designed shared cycling and walking route can improve the security and safety of pedestrians and cyclists alike. However, the first priority is for pedestrian safety and combined routes should only be attempted where this will not be put at risk.

18.21Examples of improvements to be funded by developers' contributions include:

a.Widened footways;

b.Improved surfaces to routes;

c.Improved crossing facilities that include dropped kerbs and tactile paving and, according to the needs of the location, built-out areas and/or pedestrian refuges and/or signal controlled crossing facilities;

d.Measures to ensure that parking and delivery needs can be met without causing an obstruction to pedestrians, including people with restricted mobility;

e.Street furniture and other street equipment minimised and located to ensure that it does not cause an obstruction;

f.Improved ‘natural surveillance’ and street lighting where this will improve personal safety and security; and

g.Other road safety measures.

18.22The provision of safe and convenient cycling access is, like walking, important in providing a choice of transport mode for all, and in reducing reliance on the private car.

18.23If people are to be encouraged to cycle it is essential that new roads and access points to roads are designed to accommodate cycling safely. Off-road routes will only be required where a road is designed to accommodate heavy volumes of traffic and there is insufficient room to dedicate space to cycling. Alternatively, off-road routes can create short cuts for cyclists in addition to a road option.

18.24Access points should be located where cycling distances are as short as possible within the reasonable requirements of the development and road safety.

18.25All off-road cycling routes or route corridors should be designed for safe, shared use with pedestrians, either with a cycleway alongside a footway or a wide shared path, preventing conflict between the two groups.

18.26Sufficient secure cycle parking is essential if people are to be encouraged to cycle more (see Policy A/14 - "A Strategic Cycling Route Network"). The provision of changing and showering facilities for cyclists at places of work should be considered to encourage cycle trips.

18.27 Examples of improvements to be funded by developers' contributions include:

a.Dedicated road space for cyclists or shared road space with public transport;

b.Advance stop lines at signal controlled junctions;

c.Dedicated signals at signal controlled junctions;

d.Shared pedestrian and cyclist signal controlled crossings at busy main roads;

e.Other road safety measures; and

f.Improvements to existing rights of way.

18.28The safer cycling route network will be used to inform improvements to the walking environment where appropriate.

18.29The extent that development will need to address the criteria within this policy will depend on the size, type and location of the development. It is essential that new development will facilitate access by bus services wherever possible but the policy will not be significant for most smaller scale developments.

18.30Where access by bus services is inadequate to promote bus use and it is reasonable to require the developer to contribute to improvements, a legal agreement will be sought. This could cover the provision of:

• Improvements to the highway to facilitate bus access or access to/from buses by passengers;
• Improvements to existing bus services;
• New or diverted bus services on roads outside the site; or
• New or diverted bus services using roads within the site.

18.31Off-site improvements to the local highway network are most likely to be sought. Improvements could include:

a.Bus priority measures at traffic lights, with the use of transponders in the highway and on buses;

b.Bus gates at junctions;

c.Bus lanes;

d.More convenient and safely located bus stops;

e.Bus shelters and other improvements to the waiting environment (in accordance with the LTP Bus Strategy);

f.Raised boarders, built-out stops and/or other highway measures to improve access for bus users between the pathway and passenger platform; and

g.Measures to ensure that parking and delivery needs can be met without causing an obstruction to buses.

18.32Improvements to bus services would be appropriate if the existing service was infrequent or didn't serve the site at relevant times, for example, when shifts begin and end at employment sites.

18.33Developers of large sites that are not within a reasonable walking distance of a bus stop are required to explore the potential options for a new or diverted service with GMPTE and local bus operators. As a guide, this will apply when the longest walking distance between buildings such as houses or workplace on the site and the closest bus stop is further than:

a.400 metres from a bus stop served by a high frequency bus service, considered to be every 10 minutes or more during the daytime; or

b.250 metres from a bus stop served by a bus service of 30 – 60 minutes frequency.

18.34It may be appropriate for a new or diverted bus service to serve existing roads only. Otherwise, roads within the site should be designed to be convenient for bus service operators. Opportunities for access through the site to neighbouring areas are more likely to secure a viable bus service and should be accommodated, possibly through bus gates to avoid through traffic.

18.35Walking routes between new developments and bus stops are also relevant and are still subject to the criteria within Policy A/3 - "New Development - Access for Pedestrians and Disabled People."

18.36Provision for taxi access will be required where there is sufficient demand for such facilities. The scale of provision will be determined by existing usage in the area and/or at similar developments elsewhere.

18.37Many people with restricted mobility, including disabled and elderly people, use taxis for ease of access to facilities. A safe and convenient walking distance should therefore not be greater than 100m, although in most cases it will be expected to be considerably less than this.

18.38Delivery vehicles, including vans, light goods vehicles and heavy goods vehicles play an indispensable role in supporting the local business economy and our lifestyle requirements. They require access to all industrial, commercial and shopping areas for local deliveries and for long distance carrying. The potential for transfer to rail is limited largely to longer distance bulk transport. Local deliveries are dependent on road transport and local accessibility for freight has to be accommodated.

18.39Wherever possible, provision for deliveries will be required off the highway in order to reduce conflict with access priorities for pedestrians, including people with restricted mobility, cyclists and users of public transport, reduce congestion and improve amenity. Development requiring on-highway servicing will only be permitted where it will not be detrimental to any of these interests or to road safety and general highway capacity.

18.40In considering the importance of deliveries to the local economy, access prohibitions will only be made on delivery times or size of vehicle when this is absolutely necessary to protect amenity, in particular, residential amenity at night times and amenity issues for customers, for example, in town centre streets. Mitigating measures will be sought and secured by planning condition if they relate to the physical development. If they relate to operational good practice either on the site or in respect of the delivery vehicles used or driver behaviour, commitments will be sought and the prohibition relaxed if secured by a planning obligation. In all such circumstances prohibitive measures will be held in reserve by condition of the approval.

18.41Capacity on the highway network is, understandably, a sensitive issue but the priority is to mitigate adverse impacts on safety, accessibility, congestion and/or the diversion of traffic on to less suitable roads, rather than refuse development that is otherwise in accordance with the Plan. However, there are many areas within the Borough that are densely developed and traffic congestion at peak times is a problem. Many sites suitable for development will require some improvement to the highway network or to public transport provision, if they are to function safely without creating unacceptable problems for existing users and to encourage travel choice. In the case of developments which generate significant volumes of traffic, it is expected that improvements may be identified in the context of a Transport Assessment (see Policy A/11 - "New Development -Transport Assessments").

18.42Where development proposals need to be accompanied by improvements to the existing highway network, the developer(s) will be expected to fund such improvements through Planning Obligations under S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and/or Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. Many improvements will be small scale and limited to the immediate vicinity of the site although in the case of major developments, more substantial measures may be required which may be some distance from the site. Where improvements form part of a wider scheme, a developer may be required to only fund part of the works. Where development traffic would access the highway at major junctions, the Council will usually expect the developer to fund any improvements necessary to ensure a 15 year capacity, in line with Circular 04/2001 "Control of Development affecting Trunk Roads." In addition, where the proposed development has the potential to impact upon the safe and efficient operation of the trunk road network, the Highways Agency should be consulted.

18.43Where developers propose to reduce the impact of development traffic through modal shift away from car traffic, a section 106 obligation will be required to set out a formula as to how this will be practically achieved.

18.44This Policy relates to all types of development for which vehicular access is proposed and covers access for general traffic to/from the highway and the provision of new roads within areas of new development. Parking issues are covered by separate policies.

18.45Powers to apply 20 mph speed limits in residential areas have been made available to the Council and a number of 20 mph zones have been introduced. The intention is to reduce the impact of traffic in residential areas to improve amenity and make them safer environments for children. It is, therefore, appropriate to ensure that new residential roads are designed with a 20 mph speed limit in place at the outset. It is also appropriate to extend the zone through existing residential areas to the closest local distributor road, in order to minimise the impact of additional traffic from the development on those residential areas.

18.46In order to achieve this developers will be required to fund the necessary Order. In ‘home zones’, motorists have to slow to walking pace and give way to pedestrians and cyclists. This requires a radical rethink of the street layout. Instead of a conventional roadway with a kerbed footway on each side, a shared area is designed with hard and soft landscaping and on-street parking at angles to the street, as appropriate. The co-operation of developers will be sought in incorporating 'home zones' within new residential developments.

18.47The availability of parking for cars (including cars used by disabled people), motorcycles and bicycles, is an important influence on the choice of transport mode. A balance has to be struck between discouraging car use and not imposing standards that are so stringent as to reduce the viability of developments. The Council's Parking standards for new developments have been developed in association with the other Greater Manchester authorities, taking account of up-to-date national guidance.

18.48For car parking, the Council's Parking Standards identify maximum standards, to ensure that land is used more efficiently and access by walking, cycling and public transport is encouraged. This means that in town and district centre locations in particular, where there is good existing or potential public transport access and the potential for 'walk in' or cycle trips, developments should operate successfully with levels of parking provision lower than the maximum standard. Indeed, in some locations such as Primary Shopping Areas (See Policy S/3 "Primary Shopping Areas"), it may be inappropriate or impractical to require on-site provision and there may be adequate off-site provision within the wider centre. Conversely, new car parking associated with a development could contribute to meeting the wider parking needs of the centre it is located in.

18.49The Council's Standards identify minimum car parking standards for disabled people because many disabled people must rely on cars for access to essential facilities. ('Minimum' standards mean the least number of spaces required.)

18.50Minimum cycle parking standards are also required to encourage cycling and to meet the needs of cyclists for secure parking at new developments. All cycle parking should incorporate cycle lockers, 'Sheffield stands' or other secure fixtures or areas that cycles can be locked to or within.

18.51New development in this policy includes conversion and change of use.

18.52Convenient and safe existing off-street parking can, where appropriate, be utilised to accommodate the demand from the new development. However, new off-street car parking is required to serve new development if, without it, the development would give rise to levels of increased on-street car parking that would cause additional problems for road safety, congestion, access and/or amenity in nearby streets.

18.53According to the circumstances in the area, an Order to mitigate the affects of on-street car parking could prohibit on-street parking, time limit it to meet the needs of local businesses, restrict it to local residents only, or combine all or two of these options on different lengths of road in the area. Any such controls would need to be paid for by the developer.

18.54With the exception of genuine 'dual use' town centre car parks, applicants will be required to demonstrate that there is a need for car parking above maximum levels. They will be expected to show through an assessment or other study, that measures have been considered (in the design, location and implementation of the scheme) to minimise the need for car-parking.

18.55Planning conditions will be imposed or planning obligations sought to control parking provision, (including temporary provision pending measures to achieve a shift to other modes of transport), usage (e.g., shared or dual use, length of stay), charging, and the imposition of on-street parking controls.

18.56New development makes additional demands on the transport network, increases levels of traffic and creates more pollution. This policy requires developers to deal with some of the impact of their developments instead of passing the costs on to the wider community. Transport Assessments enable local planning authorities to assess a planning application and provide a basis for discussion on details of the scheme, such as the levels of parking, the siting of the buildings and entrances, and the need for further measures to improve access arrangements to the site, mitigate transport impacts and the scope for improving access to the site by public transport, walking and cycling.

18.57Prospective developers should hold early discussions with the Council (and the Highways Agency where there is likely to be a material effect upon the trunk road network) in order to clarify whether proposals are likely to be acceptable in transport terms and to scope the requirements of any Transport Assessment. The DfT will be issuing good practice advice on the content and presentation of Transport Assessments and the application of this advice in Rochdale will be considered when it is available.

18.58Incremental development, including smaller developments that may not be considered to have significant transport implications can, over time, substantially undermine the effectiveness of the Local Transport Strategy, and can result in development overall that does not encourage or enable accessibility by non car modes. Also the cumulative effect of developments in an area or transport corridor has the potential to undermine local transport objectives. Consequently, in addition to the provision of individual highway improvements associated with the development, consideration may need to be given to a contribution to general transport improvements in the area that may be delivered in a more comprehensive manner by the Local Authority.

18.59As a guide to requiring a transport assessment, the Council would regard an increase in turning movements in the order of 5% as material in most cases, that is, a 5% increase in traffic using any link of a junction. Where the capacity of the junction is, or is near to being exceeded, a smaller percentage increase on a link would normally be material, as would any additional turning movements which in the case of, for example, heavy laden slow moving vehicles, might have serious safety implications for road users.

18.60Travel Plans currently have no standard format or content but national guidance and good practice should be used to inform them. They should seek:

a.reductions in car usage, particularly single occupancy car journeys, and increased use of walking, cycling and public transport;

b.reduced traffic speeds and improved road safety and personal security for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transport; and

c.more environmentally sensitive delivery and freight movements.

18.61The types of developments and size thresholds above which a Travel Plan will automatically be required are currently identified by Government (PPG 13 - Transport, 2001) as:

i.retail, conference facilities, cinemas and other indoor leisure developments over 1000m² gross floorspace;

ii.employment uses and higher and further education developments over 2,500m² gross floorspace; and

iii.stadia with more than 1500 seats.

18.62Certain employment and mixed-use designations in this Plan require a Travel Plan to be submitted alongside a planning application for the development of the site/area.

18.63Where the development is speculative, and the detailed data upon which a travel plan should be based is unknown, the Council will seek a framework travel plan to accompany the planning application, and a full travel plan prior to the completed development being brought into use.

18.64As part of the Local Transport Plan, a Greater Manchester walking strategy was prepared which aims to encourage walking as a mode of travel for short trips and leisure purposes. This document will guide the Council's own walking strategies and the preparation of a Local Walking Route Network which establishes key walking routes and destinations in consultation with the local community. This will enable investment to be targeted on upgrading routes to provide consistent high quality, safety and convenience for pedestrians. Convenience, comfort and safety are achieved by routes that are short, direct, wide, visible, well lit, free from obstruction, clean, in good repair, well signed and segregated from road traffic. Routes should also be accessible to people with restricted mobility.

18.65A Local Walking Route Network will include definitive rights of way but will also identify other quality routes. Many routes will mirror the highway network and follow the cycling route network whilst others will include separate walking routes through developments or open areas e.g., Greenspace Corridors. A quality network will not be achieved over the short term as funds are currently limited. However, the identification of strategic routes and the preparation of design standards as Supplementary Guidance will help the Council to prioritise investment and secure improvements through its own funding programmes, as part of regeneration projects, and as part of new development proposals.

18.66Routes identified in the 'Local Walking Route Network' will be protected and where possible improvements / new links secured through the development control process in accordance with Policy A/3 "New Development - Access For Pedestrians and Disabled People". Planning agreements with developers may be sought to secure related off-site improvements.

18.67The Local Transport Plan and the Greater Manchester Cycling Strategy promotes the identification of local cycling networks to promote cycling as a mode of travel, particularly for short trips, to reduce car travel. Such trips include journeys to school, work, shopping and community facilities (e.g., health) and for recreation in town and country. An indicative Strategic Cycling Route Network is shown on the accompanying map. The network represents a series of key linear and circular routes providing a major opportunity to improve cycling choice and provision in the Borough for a range of users and from which further links and extensions may be identified over time. The Council has adopted the Greater Manchester Cycling Strategy as the framework for the local strategy for cycling which will enable investment to be targeted and improvements secured through the development process. The intention is to establish a network of routes that link the major origins and destinations in the Borough and surrounding areas in Greater Manchester and the Southern Pennines. Thus, the network will include urban and rural routes, both on and off highway and may be shared with pedestrians and horseriders. Encouraging and facilitating cycle trips is also a key focus in the Travel Plans programme (See Policy A/12 - "New Development - Travel Plans and School Travel Plans") which will result in improved choice and opportunity for cycle use to and within specific neighbourhoods and facilities (e.g. workplaces and schools) throughout the Borough.

18.68To encourage cycle usage, routes need to be safe, pleasant and direct. In some cases the need for a direct route will be less of a priority than the cycling environment / experience, e.g., routes used primarily for recreation.

18.69Wherever possible, the network will use quieter or 'traffic calmed' residential streets along which signing and maintenance will be the primary requirements. Otherwise, roads where dedicated space for cyclists is, or can be made available, will be used. Key links away from roads may be established where they will achieve a significant benefit in terms of road safety, distance or recreational use. Such routes should be visible from surrounding land and buildings, well lit to remain highly visible at night, and suitably surfaced, in particular routes such as those promoted as part of School Travel initiatives. Consideration of lighting and visibility may be less of a priority in some urban fringe areas (where they may not be appropriate or practicable), and it should not preclude the establishment of urban links where they can make a significant contribution to the usability of the network. The whole network should be signed effectively.

18.70The Council has an active role in promoting and implementing improved cycling provision. Its ability to contribute to the implementation of a strategic network is dependent on the availability of funding through the Council’s own budgets, external grants and through opportunities arising out of development or redevelopment and major comprehensive traffic management or highway improvement schemes. The Council will continue to work with developers, local authorities and other agencies e.g. Natural England, North West Development Agency and others, to take or safeguard opportunities to establish new routes, links, improvements to existing routes (for example the Pennine Bridleway and links to it) and associated cycle facilities e.g., parking and signage. The Council will seek to secure legal agreements with developers and commuted sums to secure provision where such opportunities are identified.

18.71There is a need to make bus travel more attractive in order to reduce reliance on the car and improve social inclusion. The GMPTE, in association with the Council, propose to introduce a variety of bus priority measures and facilities. The Council is already working with GMPTE, neighbouring authorities and operators on four Quality Bus Corridors (QBCs) in the Borough. These routes are identified in the Local Transport Plan. They are:

a.A58 Littleborough town centre to Borough boundary with Bury at Heap Bridge via Rochdale and Heywood town centres;

b.A671 Rochdale town centre to Borough boundary with Oldham at Summit;

c.A664 Rochdale town centre to Borough boundary with Manchester at Alkrington via Castleton and Middleton, with spurs to Middleton and Heywood connecting with the A58 QBC; and

d.A671 Rochdale town centre to Borough boundary with Lancashire at Healey.

18.72The aim is to reduce bus journey times and variability, and improve bus reliability to make bus travel more competitive with the private car and increase the comfort and convenience of all bus users. Bus priority schemes will therefore be targeted on these corridors. Within the bus network in general, it will be important to improve the environment around bus stops through better lighting, footway improvements that include kerb heights to assist low floor bus operation, the provision of pedestrian crossing facilities, bus shelters and travel information.

18.73Rochdale bus station does not provide the standard of environment and level of facilities necessary to attract significantly more people to travel by bus.

18.74GMPTE are committed to improving Rochdale bus station. The bus station has a multi-storey car park above which is a constraint on the layout, facilities and amenity. Nevertheless, considerable improvements could be achieved.

18.75The potential for relocation should not be ignored if an alternative site would be equally well located in relation to all of the accessibility issues identified in the policy, including proximity to the Primary Shopping Area.

18.76The bus station should have sufficient capacity to accommodate all bus services serving the relevant town centre and future reasonable forecasts for growth in both services and passenger numbers, reasonably at least 10 years ahead.

18.77The quality of the waiting environment and availability of information are essential to maintaining and promoting bus use.

18.78In addition to facilitating interchange between services, bus stations should be:

a.Easily accessible on foot to and from the relevant town centre and nearby residential areas;

b.Fully accessible by people with restricted mobility;

c.Accessible by cycle with safe access into the site and secure cycle parking;

d.Served by a taxi rank within a short walking distance;

e.Served also by an area capable of accommodating dropping off and picking up of people whose journey will continue or has commenced by bus; and

f.Safe.

18.79The proposed terminus for Metrolink is located in Smith Street alongside Rochdale bus station and any proposal to relocate the bus station will need to maintain close interchange between the two.

18.80Ease of interchange between bus services and between bus and rail is essential if travel options by public transport are to compare more favourably with the flexibility of the car. Better information and signing on the availability of different services and where to catch them is required. Physical measures are also necessary in most of the locations to improve the highway environment for pedestrians, including people with restricted mobility, consistent with Policy A/24 "Strategic Highway Network" and for buses and bus users consistent with Policy A/15 "Facilities For Buses".

18.81A large part of the highway outside Mills Hill railway station is in Oldham and is the responsibility of Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council as Highway Authority. Improvements to the highway will be sought in partnership with Oldham Council.

18.82The extension of Metrolink to Rochdale and Oldham is being promoted by GMPTE and is one of the Council’s priority new infrastructure projects in support of regeneration. It is part of a single contract that also includes lines from Manchester to Manchester Airport and Ashton-under-Lyne. The contract to design, build, operate and maintain the extension is expected to be awarded at the end of 2002, and the total construction period is estimated to be in the region of five to six years. However, it is not yet known whether the lines will be constructed simultaneously or in sequence. Some lines may therefore be finished sooner than others.

18.83It is fully accessible for people with restricted mobility, and will provide a fast and frequent service into the heart of Rochdale and Oldham town centres and Manchester city centre.

18.84The alignment follows the existing Oldham – Rochdale railway line from the Borough boundary south east of Newhey to the junction with the Rochdale – Halifax railway, whereby it runs alongside the railway and then on-street at High Level Road and Maclure Road to Drake Street. Buildings fronting the south side of Drake Street between Maclure Road and Milnrow Road are proposed for demolition to accommodate the route and the proposed Drake Street stop. GMPTE hold Compulsory Purchase Powers to acquire these buildings. The route then continues on-street along Drake Street to the proposed terminus at Smith Street.

18.85In addition to the Smith Street terminus and Drake Street stop, stops are proposed at the existing Milnrow and Newhey railway stations, at Newbold in Rochdale and at Maclure Road outside Rochdale railway station. The Council and its development partners for Kingsway Business Park are also promoting a stop to serve the Business Park.

18.86The three station sites are carried forward from the Adopted UDP and are identified in GMPTE’s priority list of potential new station sites in Greater Manchester. All three stations are currently subject to an appraisal by GMPTE concerning their viability and their wider impact on the provision of rail services and how people choose to travel. It is important to assess the viability of each station against the impact on the operation and attractiveness of the service, and the effect on people's travel patterns. The policy includes those essential matters which any planning application should address to ensure integration with other forms of transport and to provide a safe and attractive environment for rail users.

18.87The GMPTE, in consultation with each Greater Manchester district, are currently developing a Rail Investment Strategy that incorporates a programme of measures, including station improvements (For example, improvements to access, safety and passenger shelter). Rochdale Council has a number of priorities that it wishes to investigate through the Rail Investment Strategy. These include a new car park, entrance, ticket office and indoor waiting area at Rochdale Station (in anticipation of the development of an interchange with Metrolink); access for people with restricted mobility at Littleborough station; and a booking office and other works at Mills Hill Station.

18.88The railway through Heywood is being restored as a heritage railway as part of the East Lancashire Railway, with a new station platform at Heywood. It is a high priority regeneration project for Heywood Township. In order to maximise the regeneration benefits of the railway, the adjoining area is allocated as an Area of Opportunity for complementary mixed use development (see Policy R/4(h)).

18.89GMPTE and Lancashire County Council are leading work to test the potential for the reinstatement of a full rail service along the line serving Heywood, Bury and Rawtenstall. There is potential also for rail freight serving sites along the line including Heywood Distribution Park and other industrial sites off Pilsworth Road. The success of all of the above initiatives is dependent on the retention of the link to the national rail network at Castleton.

18.90Notwithstanding the fact that opportunities for transfer of freight from road to rail are relatively limited, those opportunities that do exist can be commercially advantageous. Subject to the safeguards outlined, the use of rail for freight can also reduce congestion and the environmental impact of freight and should be facilitated. Rail side industrial areas that might have potential include:

a.Mills Hill industrial area;

b.Stakehill Industrial Park;

c.Trans-Pennine Industrial Estate, Castleton

d.Royle Pennine Trading Estate;

e.Dunlop Mills, Castleton;

f.Chichester Street Industrial Estate; Rochdale

g.Todmorden Road industrial area, Littleborough;

h.Heywood Distribution Park; and

i.Pilsworth Road industrial area, Heywood.

18.91Developers may be required to fund highway and railway infrastructure improvements and other mitigating measures, as part of a planning obligation, to ensure that the additional traffic can be accommodated on the highway and railway network. This should ensure that there is no negative impact on road congestion or rail capacity, or detriment to road safety, and that safe access to/from the highway can be achieved.

18.92Car parking provision, in particular short stay parking, is essential to the vitality and viability of town and district centres. Off-street car parks are essential to ensure that on-street parking can be restricted to locations where it will not cause problems for road safety, congestion, access and/or amenity. Within town centres, the Council's aim is to ensure adequate short-stay shopper and visitor parking in as central a location as possible, whilst siting longer stay commuter parking at the edges.

18.93Middleton, Heywood, Littleborough and Rochdale all suffer to varied extents from piecemeal car parking provision. However, Heywood has benefited from the large car park at the Times Retail Park and Middleton should benefit similarly from the rationalisation of car parking provision as part of the major redevelopment in the town centre. Littleborough has two main car parks within the town centre, neither of which are particularly well related to the Central Shopping Area. Rochdale has three large car parks along with a number of small car parks that are not meeting the needs of the town centre as well as they could. This policy will be further considered following monitoring of the parking provision within the four town centres.

18.94Milnrow district centre and the local centres have varying ranges of off-street public car parking with none in some of the local centres. The parking provision that does exist is likely to be serving a valuable function for the centres concerned, and improved provision, including stand-alone car parks, may in some circumstances help increase the vitality and viability of the centre.

18.95Sufficient, suitably located car parking provision means enough, appropriately sited, car parking to meet the need of the centre. The nature of this need may change over time, and so this also needs to be taken into account. The demand can also be reduced through additional measures, such as the provision of increased public transport services.

18.96In all circumstances the need to retain or replace car parking will be considered against available evidence. The Council has records of the usage of its own pay and display car parks. Other operators will be expected to produce evidence of parking use. A balance will need to be struck between usage at the busiest times of the week and at the busiest times of the year.

18.97New car parking in town centres will only be permitted in the circumstances listed above in order to restrict the amount of traffic in central areas, thereby reducing pollution and improving the pedestrian environment.

18.98There is a shortage of car parking serving Rochdale Station and approximately 40 on-street spaces will be lost to accommodate Metrolink at a time when demand for spaces could increase considerably. The provision of dedicated off-street car parking is a longstanding priority of the Council, and secure off-street parking will help to increase the attractiveness of using the railway for commuting. In respect of Metrolink, a commitment has been secured that best endeavours will be used to secure 40 replacement spaces. The site of the disused platforms at the station could accommodate up to 250 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Miall Street. If parking was provided at platform level, a lift and/or access ramp would be needed for people with restricted mobility to get from the car park to the station subway and up to operational platforms. Security will need to be a high priority in the design and implementation of the car park.

18.99The role of the Strategic Highway Network has been to accommodate general traffic – including lorries - between urban areas and to/from the motorway network and, in doing so, reduce the impact of traffic in other areas. This remains the case but the challenge for the future is to continue doing so while also prioritising bus priority measures and the pedestrian and cyclist environment, both along the route and at points across it.

18.100All of the above schemes will seek to enhance vehicular capacity except Assheton Way / Oldham Road / Middleton Way where current vehicular capacity is much greater on these short sections of dual carriageway than on feeder roads to them. In this location, there is potential to improve pedestrian accessibility by reducing the width of the roads and providing surface level pedestrian crossings in place of the existing subways. Cycle and bus access could also be enhanced.

18.101Proposals a), b), e), f), g) and h) are all on Quality Bus Corridors and bus priority measures will need to be accommodated within the overall junction improvements. The improvements at Milnrow Road / Oldham Road / Drake Street also need to accommodate Metrolink. The new highway between Kingsway and the M62 is needed to serve Kingsway Business Park so that traffic does not have to use the A640 Rochdale Road and Elizabethan Way to/from the M62. In addition, where the proposed improvement has the potential to impact upon the safe and efficient operation of the trunk road network, the Highways Agency should be consulted.

Priorities a) - e) are carried forward from the Adopted UDP.