 |
|
|
Part 2
6 - Transportation and Access |
| |
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
| T1 |
Highway Improvement
and Traffic Management |
| The Council will carry out
new highway construction, highway improvement and traffic management
schemes with the aims listed below. The access arrangements for development
schemes must also be designed with these aims, wherever appropriate. |
| (a) |
improving safety for all
road users, |
| (b) |
encouraging the use of
non car modes, |
| (c) |
providing safe and convenient
facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, |
| (d) |
improving road and community
safety especially in residential areas, |
| (e) |
improving safety and the
environment in town and local centres, assisting their viability and
encouraging new investment, |
| (f) |
assisting sustainable development, |
| (g) |
safe management of congestion
problems, |
| (h) |
improving the efficiency
and attractiveness of public transport and the convenience and safety
of passengers, |
| (i) |
providing for the needs
of people with mobility difficulties, |
| (j) |
providing for the safe
use of powered two wheelers, |
| (k) |
providing for the sustainable
movement of freight, |
| (l) |
conserving and enhancing
the valued characteristics of an area through the use of appropriate
design and materials. |
| National transport
policy seeks to reduce reliance on the private car, widen choice and
increase social inclusion. Highway schemes brought forward by the
Council will be in the context of an overall land use and transport
strategy as set out in the UDP and the Greater Manchester Local Transport
Plan. New roads will only be considered where they are consistent
with the overall strategy and necessary to secure environmental or
safety improvements or permit development. There is no intention to
build roads simply to facilitate car borne commuting. The list (a)
to (l) indicates the range of aims which will underlie traffic management
and improvement proposals. |
|
|
| T2 |
Trunk Road Developments |
| The Council will protect
the line of the Mottram to Tintwistle Bypass, proposed by the Highways
Agency as a trunk road scheme, from the M67/A57/A560 intersection
at Hattersley to the Derbyshire border. |
| In 1992, the
Department of Transport carried out a public consultation exercise
on route options for this proposed bypass, and announced the preferred
route in 1993. This leaves the M67 terminal roundabout in a north-easterly
direction, passes through a short tunnel north of Mottram village
and then continues on to pass north of Thorncliffe Farm before crossing
the Derbyshire boundary north of Arnfield Reservoir. This preferred
route, including a link connecting the bypass to the existing A57
at Mottram Moor, is shown on the proposals map and is already being
protected from development. |
| The scheme
is an integral component of the South Pennines Integrated Transport
Strategy. In Regional Planning Guidance for the North West, published
in March 2003, policy T10 identifies the scheme as a Transport Proposal
of Regional Significance that should be delivered by 2007 as a matter
of priority (subject to availability of resources, detailed appraisal
and appropriate statutory procedures). It is included in the Highways
Agency's Targeted Programme of Improvements, for completion in 2008,
subject to statutory procedures. Draft Orders are expected to be published
in 2004. |
|
|
| T3 |
Major Highway Schemes |
| Highway schemes proposed
to be carried out during the plan period: |
| (1) |
Glossop Spur from Mottram
Moor to Woolley Lane, Longdendale (local road element of the proposed
Mottram - Tintwistle Bypass) |
| |
The Glossop
Spur will add to the Highways Agency's proposed A57 (T)/A628 (T) Mottram
to Tintwistle Bypass by extending the link off their main east-west
route beyond Mottram Moor through to Woolley Bridge. As a result,
Hollingworth will be more effectively relieved of through traffic,
bus reliability will be improved and pedestrians and cyclists will
be provided with a safer, more convenient and attractive environment.
The scheme is not intended to increase capacity or improve journey
times for general travel. The scheme will be promoted jointly by Tameside
MBC and Derbyshire County Council, and will be progressed to dovetail
the design and statutory processes with those of the trunk road scheme.
Close liaison will be maintained with the Highways Agency and they
will seek an assessment of the transport impact of the scheme in order
to ensure the continued safe and efficient operation of the trunk
road network. |
| (2) |
Turner Lane to Penny Meadow,
Ashton town centre (Stage 2 of Ashton Northern Bypass - former ATC3)
|
| |
The Ashton
Northern Bypass (Stage 2) will provide a single carriageway diversion
of the A6043 Wellington Road between Turner Lane and Penny Meadow
in Ashton town centre. It will complete the ring of relief roads around
the town centre by extending the Ashton Northern Bypass (Stage 1)
through to the Arlington Street Link in the north of the town. The
scheme is not intended to increase highway capacity or improve journey
times for general traffic. It will deliver the Greater Manchester
Local Transport Plan objectives by extending the existing town centre
pedestrian priority measures into Wellington Road in order to create
a more attractive and safe environment. It will also provide safe
and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes into the town centre, assist
bus service operation on the proposed A635 Quality Bus Corridor by
releasing buses from traffic congestion at this important passenger
destination, and provide the opportunity to upgrade the passenger
waiting environment. The scheme has been accepted through the Greater
Manchester Local Transport Plan and funding has been made available
for a start in 2004 and completion in 2006, subject to statutory procedures.
A planning application for the construction of the new road, and associated
remodelling of existing car parks, was approved in September 2003. |
| |
| Please note
that proposal T3(3) (Ashworth Lane Link Road) has been removed from
the plan |
| |
| The Council will protect
the alignment of these highway schemes which are shown on the proposals
map. |
|
|
| T4 |
Rail Infrastructure |
| The Council will permit
and where necessary facilitate the provision of new rail stations,
improved facilities at existing stations including attention to special
needs, and additional local station car parking and cycle storage
facilities (small scale park and ride). |
| The Local Transport
Plan sets out a strategy for the provision of rail services in Greater
Manchester. This aims to improve the attractiveness of heavy rail
travel including new and improved stations, enhanced park and ride
and cycle and ride opportunities, and more reliable and frequent services.
The strategy aims to build on heavy rail's potential to serve both
the commuter and longer distance travel markets including access to
Manchester Airport, reducing both congestion and reliance on the private
car. New stations are expected to be brought forward through partnerships
with the rail industry including improvements secured through franchise
replacement. A Greater Manchester Strategic Rail Study which examines
the infrastructure needs of the area has been carried out on behalf
of the Strategic Rail Authority. The Greater Manchester authorities
considered this during 2001, along with the GMPTA's previously completed
Fixed Track Strategy, and in 2002 the GMPTE developed a Rail Investment
Plan for consultation with these authorities. |
| Rail schemes proposed to
be carried out during the plan period: |
| (1) |
New Droylsden station west
of Littlemoss Road bridge (former DRO1) |
| |
The proposed
location for a new Droylsden station west of the Littlemoss Road railway
bridge is on the site of the original station which closed around
30 years ago. Since that time there has been substantial housing development
nearby, including the former Reyners site immediately adjoining which
was under construction in 2003. The station will enable residents
of this part of Droylsden to take advantage of the present train service
west to Manchester, and east to Ashton, Stalybridge, Mossley, Huddersfield
and Wakefield. Although envisaged to be a predominantly walk-in station,
land is available on which a small car park could be provided. Droylsden
is included in the Local Transport Plan within a list of possible
new stations to be developed. |
| (2) |
New Dukinfield station north
of King Street / Dewsnap Lane junction (former DUK2) |
| |
Although the
local rail services from Manchester to Glossop and Marple run through
the southern part of Dukinfield close to extensive residential areas,
the only available station for the Dukinfield area is at Hyde North.
That station is not well located in relation to much of the town's
population and has a very poor access from Johnson Brook Road. Also,
there are no platforms on the Glossop line at Hyde North, thereby
reducing the possible service. The new station will be located north
of the King Street/Dewsnap Lane junction, so it can be served by both
the Manchester to Marple and Manchester to Glossop services. Dukinfield
is included in the Local Transport Plan (as Dewsnap) within a list
of possible new stations to be developed. |
| (3) |
Enhancement of Stalybridge
rail station area and additional car parking (former STC7 and STC13)
|
| |
Stalybridge
railway station is served by both the longer distance North Trans
Pennine expresses and the Manchester-Ashton-Huddersfield-Wakefield
stopping service. The station is used by commuters, shoppers and longer
distance travellers and functions to some extent as a gateway for
the Borough and a railhead for Trans Pennine services. Some station
car parking is provided but this is inadequate to meet demand. Enhancement
of the rail station area and provision of additional parking will
need to be brought forward as a partnership between the rail industry,
the GMPTE and the Council and will be dependant on the availability
of funding. |
| (4) |
Development of Guide Bridge
Station and adjoining land as a parkway station serving Trans-Pennine,
Manchester Airport and long distance travel needs. |
| |
If this proposal is not
brought forward by the rail industry and funding bodies, or is subsequently
proposed for another rail route in the Borough, the station will be
enhanced for local travel needs and compatible development opportunities
realised on the adjoining land. |
| |
Guide Bridge
station is served by the Manchester to Glossop and Marple local services
but has seen little investment in recent years. The longer distance
North Trans Pennine service passes through Guide Bridge but currently
does not stop. Depending on the investment programme agreed through
the refranchising process for Trans Pennine Express which was nearing
completion in 2003, Guide Bridge could be redeveloped and extended
as a parkway station serving longer distance travel needs. This could
include improved rail access from the Borough to Manchester Airport
taking advantage of its location with good access to the M60. Land
is available adjoining the existing station for such a scheme, which
would include substantial amounts of car parking. If this did not
proceed the station's role serving the local community will need to
be enhanced through improvements to the station environment and provision
of small scale park and ride opportunities. |
|
|
| T5 |
Metrolink Extension |
| The Council will protect
the alignment of the proposed extension of the Manchester Metrolink
light rapid transit system to Ashton under Lyne via Droylsden and
Audenshaw, as approved in the Transport and Works Act Order. |
| The proposed
Metrolink extension will provide a frequent, high capacity link between
Manchester, Droylsden, Audenshaw and Ashton. In Tameside it will be
constructed along the line of the A662 Ashton New Road and then cross
Ashton Moss to reach Ashton town centre alongside Wellington Road
and the bus station, with intermediate stops at Edge Lane, Cemetery
Road, Droylsden (town centre), Audenshaw (Ryecroft Hall) and Ashton
West (Richmond Street). A further stop may also be provided at Ashton
Moss. This scheme is part of a wider proposal to extend the Metrolink
network across Greater Manchester and is an important part of the
Local Transport Plan. By offering an attractive alternative to the
car it is expected to reduce the number of car trips and associated
congestion problems. The necessary powers to build the line have been
obtained, Government funding has been secured, and GMPTE is currently
engaged in the process of selecting the consortium to build and operate
this and the other new lines. The process was in its final stages
in 2003 and the design and construction contract should start in 2004
for opening not later than 2010. |
|
|
| T6 |
Facilities for Buses |
| The Council, in association
with Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive, will facilitate
the provision of high quality, safe and accessible bus passenger waiting
and interchange facilities. |
| On-highway bus priority
measures, such as those proposed in connection with Quality Bus Corridors,
will be introduced. These will include bus lanes where feasible in
terms of available road width. |
| As part of
the means to reduce reliance on the car and improve social inclusion,
the GMPTE in association with the Council is introducing measures
to make bus travel more attractive. Bus travel involves some degree
of passenger waiting and it is important to make that experience as
safe, accessible and comfortable as possible. The Council will improve
the environment at and around bus stops through better street lighting,
footway improvements that include kerb heights to assist low floor
bus operation, and provision of pedestrian crossing facilities. |
| A network of
Quality Bus Corridors is being implemented or is proposed across Greater
Manchester as part of the Local Transport Plan, including four corridors
in Tameside. The aim is to reduce bus journey times and variability,
and improve bus reliability, to make bus travel more competitive with
the car and to increase the comfort and convenience for all bus users.
Measures being considered include on-highway bus priority schemes.
However, because of limited available highway width on many of Tameside's
roads, there are likely to be only limited opportunities for the introduction
of bus lanes. Alternative measures such as selective vehicle detection
at traffic signals will be considered where appropriate in order to
give priority to buses. |
| Planning permission
was granted in November 2002 for a remodelling and enhancement scheme
at Hyde Bus Station in which all facilities will be located on a single
central island, and preliminary works to implement this scheme were
started in 2003. |
| |
|
| Please note
that proposal T6(1) (Hyde Bus Station) has been removed from the plan
due to development starting |
|
|
| T7 |
Cycling |
| A Borough wide network of
cycle routes will be defined, connecting residential areas, town centres,
transport interchanges, employment, education, health and leisure
destinations, and attractions outside the Borough. |
| Where possible and appropriate,
development of the network will be co-ordinated with neighbouring
authorities to improve cross boundary linkages and assist with the
completion of the national cycle network. Off highway tracks will
be utilised where appropriate. |
| Designated cycle routes
will be protected from development or provision made within developments
to ensure that links in the network are completed. |
| Development proposals will
be required to consider provision for cyclists including secure cycle
parking where appropriate. The Council will provide or facilitate
secure cycle parking at major attractors where appropriate. |
| PPG13 states
that cycling has potential to substitute for short car trips and to
form part of a longer journey by public transport. The Local Transport
Plan seeks to promote cycling as a mode of travel, particularly for
short trips, to reduce car travel. Cycling for leisure may also produce
health benefits. The Local Transport Plan sets out targets for increased
cycle use. At the present time cycling levels are low in Tameside
and usage needs to be encouraged by the provision of safe, pleasant
and convenient routes for cyclists. Development proposals brought
forward will need to demonstrate how the needs of cyclists will be
addressed and how the development will contribute to the Council's
aim of increasing cycling as a mode of travel. The policy document
"Cycling in Tameside" was approved in 1996 and contains a draft cycle
network plan. This proposed network will be reviewed to take account
of current circumstances, likely future opportunities, and strategies
and targets in the National Cycling Strategy and the Local Transport
Plan. Off highway routes will be utilised where appropriate but there
is also potential for the definition of routes which could follow
a series of quieter roads. Cyclists will also be able to use bus lanes
brought forward as part of the Quality Bus Corridor initiative or
other schemes, and these will be considered for inclusion in a cycle
network |
| The aim will
be to provide over time a network that links major origins and destination
in the Borough and surrounding areas, including links to the national
cycle network. The Council's ability to achieve this will be dependent
upon the availability of funding and opportunities arising out of
development or redevelopment. If more people are to be encouraged
to cycle, secure cycle parking facilities will also need to be provided
at major attractors and workplaces as part of the bringing forward
of the cycle route network, taking advantage of opportunities arising
from town centre improvement schemes and as part of development proposals.
Secure cycle parking and storage will be required to be incorporated
in new development proposals where appropriate. |
|
|
| T8 |
Walking |
| A network of key routes
and rights of way will be developed and improved, incorporating trails,
paths and footways in both urban and countryside areas and with roles
ranging from regional to local, in order to facilitate walking as
a means of travel and for leisure. |
| The Council will aim to
secure safe and convenient pedestrian routes between residential areas
and major attractors, including town centres, schools, employment,
health and leisure developments and public transport facilities. Improvements
will be co-ordinated with neighbouring authorities wherever possible
in order to improve cross boundary linkages. |
| Public Rights of Way will
be protected where they fall within sites proposed for development,
subject to consideration of opportunities for local re-routing where
this would improve convenience and safety for pedestrians. |
| The needs of pedestrians
must be taken account of in new development schemes, with the aim
of encouraging travel on foot and by public transport. Particular
emphasis should be placed on providing safe and convenient routes
within and to/from the Borough's town and district centres, major
developments and public transport facilities. Steps should be taken
to ensure that underpasses are made as safe as possible for pedestrians. |
| As 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 for leisure purposes. This document is intended to act as
a template for Councils to prepare their own walking strategies and
encourages them to establish key walking routes and destinations in
consultation with the local community. The aim is to encourage Councils
to target resources on upgrading those key routes to provide consistent
high quality, safety and convenience for pedestrians. Improvements
to other routes should be brought forward in line with the overall
aims of the strategy. This should maximise the benefits to be achieved
from the investment and provide the most effective way of encouraging
more people to walk. The policy document 'Walking in Tameside' was
approved in 1997. This will be updated in line with the Greater Manchester
Walking Strategy in consultation with the local community. The Local
Transport Plan sets out targets for increasing walking activity. Development
proposals brought forward will need to demonstrate how the needs of
pedestrians will be addressed and how the development will contribute
to the Council's aim of increasing walking as a mode of travel. |
| The Countryside
and Rights of Way Act 2000 requires that local authorities produce
a Rights of Way Improvement Plan within five years of Regulations
becoming available under the Act. The convenience and safety of pedestrians
will be considered when assessing any proposal for the diversion of
a Public Right of Way. If people are to be encouraged to walk or use
public transport then pedestrian routes to and from developments,
bus stops and stations etc must be both safe and convenient. New developments
will need to provide for pedestrian routes that are designed with
safety in mind and that do not involve an unacceptably indirect route.
At-grade pedestrian crossing facilities are preferred to underpasses
or footbridges. Where there is no alternative to an underpass then
such a facility should be designed carefully to minimise potential
for crime and fear of crime, paying particular attention to inter
visibility, surface finishes, street lighting and possible CCTV. |
|
|
| T9 |
Freight Movement |
| Traffic management measures
will be taken to prevent the use of unsuitable roads by heavy lorries
where necessary, particularly within residential areas, and to maximise
the use of the strategic highway network for this purpose. |
| The Council will facilitate
the use of rail for freight transport, including provision for road-rail
transfer and measures in connection with Central Railway's proposal
for a new rail freight route through the Borough, subject to schemes
not having an adverse effect on the amenities of surrounding residential
areas or creating traffic problems. |
| Efficient access
for freight is important to the economy of the Borough but there is
also a need to minimise disturbance, congestion and vehicle emissions.
The completion of the M60 motorway has resulted in the removal of
through heavy goods vehicle traffic from local roads. However, there
are still problems with access for such traffic in some areas of the
Borough because of the mixed land use pattern. In some locations it
may be possible to minimise the problems through traffic management
measures although legitimate access needs to be provided for. Some
of the problems may be alleviated by the gradual redevelopment of
poorly located industrial and storage premises for other uses. The
development of appropriate sites for road-rail transfer will assist
with the encouragement of more freight transported by rail. The Council
has resolved to support in principle Central Railway's proposal for
a new rail freight route from Liverpool to northern France which would
pass through Tameside. |
| (1) |
The Council will protect
the alignment of the former Crowthorne Curve rail route at Guide Bridge
for possible future rail freight use. |
| |
The Crowthorne
Curve is a disused rail track bed running between the operational
Guide Bridge to Manchester and the Denton to Ashton Moss lines. However,
it has been bridged by the new Moss Way / Audenshaw road junction
and potential exists for it to be brought back into use for rail purposes
subject to any permissions required. |
|
|
| T10 |
Parking |
| Council owned, public car
parks will be managed so as to encourage short stay use, to support
commercial activity in the town centres and to discourage car borne
commuting. |
| The Council will require
opportunities for the shared use of car parks to be examined when
considering major development proposals and development proposals
in town centres. |
| Safety and security of car
parks will be improved through design, improved lighting and CCTV.
Provision will be made for disabled parking and for carers with child
parking where appropriate. Secure parking for cycles and powered two
wheelers will be provided at appropriate locations within town and
local centres and at bus and rail stations. |
| Proposals will be brought
forward, following local consultation, for secure off-street parking
where needed in residential areas and where suitable sites are available. |
| New developments will be
subject to maximum levels of parking provision, in accordance with
standards to be established in association with the other Greater
Manchester authorities and in line with national and regional guidance.
The draft standards are set out in table 4. |
| The Local Transport
Plan seeks to minimise the need to travel and encourage the use of
non car modes, and enhancing the viability and vitality of town and
district centres is fundamental to achieving these aims. However,
as well as good public transport access to town centres, there is
also a need to cater adequately for car borne shoppers and other short
stay users in order to counteract the attraction of out of centre
shopping and leisure facilities. It is important that car parks provided
for these users are, and are perceived to be, safe. The LTP also seeks
to reduce car borne commuting, and the availability of parking is
an important factor in influencing choice of mode for travel to work.
Safe parking provision for disabled people and carers with children
will be provided in line with Council policy. Secure parking at convenient
locations will be required if cycles and powered two wheelers are
to be encouraged and facilitated as a sustainable transport choice. |
| In some residential
areas there is little in-curtilage parking and insufficient roadspace
to meet parking demands. The potential for providing secure off-street
parking in residential areas, possibly making use of small areas of
vacant or under-used land, will be considered in consultation with
residents and subject to the availability of land and funding. |
| The availability
of car parking at a destination is an important influence on the choice
of transport mode. In line with national (PPG13) and regional (RSS)
policies to reduce car use, upper limits will be set for the amount
of parking to be provided in new developments. Draft parking standards
which would apply to Greater Manchester as a whole have been drawn
up and were the subject of extensive consultations in April and May
2003. These are shown in table 4. The results of the consultations
were being assessed in September 2003 and it is possible that some,
probably minor, changes will be made before they are adopted by the
Greater Manchester authorities later in 2003 or early 2004. After
that, further information about the detailed application of the standards
will be provided in supplementary planning guidance. In locations
with good existing or potential public transport access or the opportunity
for walk-in or cycle trips, typically town and district centres, it
may be possible for developments to operate satisfactorily with lower
amounts of parking provision than the maxima. A balance has to be
struck between not actively encouraging car use, whilst not being
so stringent as to reduce the viability of developments in town and
district centres, thereby generating demands for development in other
locations where travel by non car modes may be more difficult. The
Council will encourage the shared use of car parks, which can reduce
the total amount of land occupied by parking facilities. For example,
it may be possible for office uses and leisure uses to share parking
facilities because the peak levels of use do not coincide |
| |
| TABLE 4: DRAFT GREATER
MANCHESTER PARKING STANDARDS |
| Type of development |
Maximum standard for car parking
provision (excluding disabled parking) |
Minimum standard for car parking
provision for disabled people |
Minimum standard for cycle parking
provision |
Minimum standard for motorcycle
parking |
| A1 - Shops |
| Food retail <900 sqm |
1 per 25 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total
capacity, which ever is greater. |
1 per 200 sqm minimum of 2 |
Individual consideration |
| Food retail >900 sqm |
1 per 16 sqm |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity |
1 per 200 sqm |
1 per 600 sqm, minimum of 2 spaces |
| A1 - Shops |
| Non-food retail <900 sqm |
1 per 30 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total
capacity, which ever is greater . |
1 per 200 sqm minimum of 2 |
Individual consideration |
| Non-food retail >900 sqm |
1 per 22 sqm |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity |
1 per 200 sqm |
1 per 900 sqm, minimum of 2 spaces |
| A2 - Financial & Professional
services |
| A2 - Financial & Professional services |
1 per 25 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total capacity, which ever
is greater.
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total capacity
|
1 per 400 sqm, minimum of 2 spaces |
Individual consideration |
| A3 - Food & drink |
| Restaurants |
1 per 7 sqm Public Floor Area |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total
capacity, which ever is greater . |
1 per 140 sqm public floor area minimum
of 2 spaces |
1 per 280 sqm public floor area- minimum
of 2 spaces |
| Fast Food Drive Through |
1 per 8.5 sqm Gross Floor Area |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity |
|
|
| B1 - Business |
| Stand alone offices |
1 per 35 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - Individual bays for
each disabled employee plus 2 bays or 5% of total capacity,
whichever is greater. |
1 per 400 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 1,400 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
| Business Parks |
1 per 40 sqm |
Over 200 Bays - 6 bays plus 2% of total
capacity |
|
|
| Type of development |
Maximum standard for car parking
provision (excluding disabled parking) |
Minimum standard for car parking
provision for disabled people |
Minimum standard for cycle parking
provision |
Minimum standard for motorcycle
parking |
| B2 - General |
| industry |
1 per 60 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - Individual bays for each disabled employee
plus 2 bays or 5% of total capacity, whichever is greater.
Over 200 Bays - 6 bays plus 2% of total capacity
|
1 per 700 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 2,800 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
| B8 - Storage or distribution |
| Storage or distribution |
1 per 100 sqm |
Up to 200 Bays - Individual bays for each disabled employee
plus 2 bays or 5% of total capacity, whichever is greater.
Over 200 Bays - 6 bays plus 2% of total capacity
|
1 per 850 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 4,000 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
| C1 - Hotels |
| Hotels |
1 per bedroom including staff leisure
and conference facilities should be considered separately if
appropriate |
Up to 200 Bays -
3 bays or 6% of the total capacity, which ever is the greater.
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total capacity.
|
1 per 10 bedrooms, minimum 2 spaces |
1 per 40 bedrooms minimum of 2 spaces |
| C2 - Residential Institutions
|
| Hospitals |
To be determined through a Transport
Assessment |
To be determined through a Transport
Assessment |
To be determined through a Transport
Assessment |
To be determined through a Transport
Assessment |
| Care / nursing homes |
1 per 4 beds |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of the total capacity, which
ever is the greater.
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total capacity.
|
1 per 40 beds, minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 160 beds minimum of 2 spaces |
| Type of development |
Maximum standard for car parking
provision (excluding disabled parking) |
Minimum standard for car parking
provision for disabled people |
Minimum standard for cycle parking
provision |
Minimum standard for motorcycle
parking |
| C3 - Dwelling Houses |
| 2+ bedrooms outside town centres |
2 per dwelling |
No standard |
No standard |
No standard |
| Single bed dwellings and dwellings
in town centres |
1.25 per dwelling |
No standard |
No standard |
No standard |
| Flats/apartments |
| 2+bedrooms outside town centres |
2 per dwelling |
Where parking is located centrally
for flat and apartment developments, at least 5% of the car
parking spaces should be disabled persons parking standard compliant. |
Flats and apartments 1secure locker
per 5 dwellings minimum of 2 spaces. |
Individual consideration |
| Single bed dwellings and flats/apartments
in town centres |
1.25 per dwelling |
As above |
As above |
As above |
| Sheltered housing |
1 per 3 dwellings |
10% of sheltered housing parking should
be disabled persons parking standard compliant |
No standard |
No standard |
| D1 - Non-residential
institutions |
| Medical or health facility |
1 per 2 full time equivalent staff
+ 3 per consulting room |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of the
total capacity, which ever is the greater. |
1 per 10 full time equivalent staff,
minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 40 full time equivalent staff,
minimum of 2 spaces |
| Crθche, day nursery or day centre |
1 per full time equivalent staff |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity. |
1 per 10 full time equivalent staff,
minimum of 2 spaces for pupils |
No standard |
| Schools |
1.5 spaces per classroom |
|
1 per 10 full time equivalent staff
+ 1 per 10 pupils |
1 per 40 full time equivalent staff
minimum of 2 spaces |
| Higher or further education |
1 per 2 full time equivalent staff |
|
1 per 10 full time equivalent staff
+ 1 per 10 students |
1 per 80 full time equivalent staff
+ 1 per 600 students |
| Art gallery, museum, exhibition hall
or library |
1 per 30 sqm public floor area |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of the
total capacity, which ever is the greater. |
1 per 300 sqm public floor area minimum
of 2 spaces |
1 per 1200 sqm public floor area
minimum of 2 spaces |
| Public hall or place of worship |
1 per 5 sqm public floor area |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity. |
1 per 50 sqm public floor area minimum
of 2 spaces |
1 per 200 sqm public floor area minimum
of 2 spaces |
| D2 - Assembly & Leisure |
| Cinema, bingo hall or casino, concert
hall |
1 per 8 seats |
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total
capacity, which ever is greater |
1 per 80 seats minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 320 seats minimum of 2 spaces |
| Indoor sports or recreation |
1 per 25 sqm |
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total
capacity |
1 per 250 sqm minimum of 4 spaces |
1 per 1,000 sqm minimum of 2 spaces |
| Outdoor sports and recreation |
Individual consideration. |
Individual consideration |
Individual consideration. |
Individual consideration |
| Miscellaneous |
| Stadia / spectator seating |
1 space per 18 seats
1 coach parking space per 1000 seats (minimum standard)
|
Up to 200 Bays - 3 bays or 6% of total capacity, which ever
is greater
Over 200 Bays - 4 bays plus 4% of total capacity
|
1 per 150 seats minimum of 2 spaces |
1 per 600 seats minimum of 2 spaces |
| Railway/Bus stations, and tram stops |
Individual consideration. |
Individual consideration. |
Minimum of 10 per station
Individual consideration for tram stops
|
Individual consideration. |
|
|
|
| T11 |
Travel Plans |
| The Council will require
Travel Plans to be produced in support of proposals for new development
expected to result in significant travel implications. |
| Travel Plans will need to
demonstrate how developments will contribute to sustainable transport
objectives including reducing car usage, increasing use of walking,
cycling and public transport, reducing traffic speeds and improving
safety particularly for pedestrians and cyclists, and facilitating
more environmentally friendly delivery and freight movements. |
| Travel Plans
can help in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives, help
raise the awareness of the impacts of travel decisions and can contribute
to the efficient operation of businesses. They can be developed in
response to particular travel related problems at existing development.
Those brought forward as part of a development proposal will enable
measures to assist public transport, walking and cycling to be designed
into the development and may reduce car parking needs. Travel Plans
to be submitted alongside planning applications should be worked up
in consultation with the Council, GMPTE and local transport providers.
Further guidance on the need for and role of travel plans is provided
by the Government in PPG13. |
|
|
| T12 |
Special Needs |
| The Council will require
the access needs of relatively disadvantaged people, including the
elderly, the disabled, parents with young children, and others with
sensory impairment or restricted mobility, to be taken into account
in development proposals of all kinds. |
| In line with
national and local policies the Council is seeking to widen travel
choice and reduce social exclusion. Development proposals will need
to take account of special access needs through their Travel Plan
and through the provision of appropriate facilities such as tactile
paving, dropped kerbs and designated parking spaces. The Council should
be consulted on the requirements for, and design of these facilities. |
|
|
| T13 |
Transport Investment |
| Where additional movements
directly generated by a development proposal would place demands on
the existing transportation infrastructure, which would not be overcome
by programmed improvement schemes but which are capable of resolution
by specific schemes associated with the proposal, including provision
of public transport, pedestrian and cycle facilities, the necessary
investment will be expected to be provided by the developer. |
| Such improvement schemes
will be related to the scale of the proposal, or where they can be
designed to serve other needs at the same time, an appropriate contribution
would be expected from the developer. Account will be taken of the
desirability of making the development as accessible as possible to
public transport and by foot and cycle, and of ensuring that existing
public transport services are not unacceptably impeded. |
| Much of Tameside
is heavily built up and suffers from congestion, particularly at peak
times. 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 assist with the encouragement of sustainable
travel choices. For developments which are likely to have significant
transport implications it is expected that improvements will be brought
forward within the context of a Travel Plan for the development. Improvements
generally should take account of the need for safe and convenient
facilities for pedestrians, cyclists and the mobility impaired. Undue
delay to buses should be avoided and measures to improve access to
public transport considered. |
| Where it is
clear that a development proposal must be accompanied by improvements
to the existing transportation network or to public transport provision,
if planning permission is to be granted, the developer(s) will be
expected to carry out such improvements through planning conditions
where they fall within the application site, or to fund them through
planning obligations under S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 or Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. Many improvements will
be small scale and limited to the immediate vicinity of the site.
In the case of major developments more substantial measures may be
required which may be some distance from the development site. Where
improvements form part of a wider scheme, a developer may be required
only to fund part of the works. |
|
|
| T14 |
Transport Assessments |
| Where a development will
have significant transport implications, planning permission will
not be granted until an agreed Transport Assessment has been completed
which shows whether or not associated highway works or other measures
are necessary. |
| The scope of the Transport
Assessment will be specified by the Highways Agency for trunk roads
and the Council for local roads. |
| Applicants will be expected
to supply an air quality impact assessment alongside a Transport Assessment,
so that the effect of the traffic generation on any Air Quality Management
Area that may be declared can be considered. |
| A Transport
Assessment is required to identify whether or not a proposed development
is acceptable in transport terms. The judgement of whether a development
will have significant transport implications should be made in relation
to a base position which reflects the maximum likely traffic generation
of lawful or permitted use of the site, rather than necessarily that
generated by the current or most recent user. Where an earlier planning
permission is extant at the time of submission of a subsequent application,
the procedures of this policy should not apply to development generating
no more traffic than that already approved. What constitutes "significant"
cannot be prescribed for all circumstances. For example, the Highways
Agency would regard an increase of traffic in the order of 5% on any
link of a junction with a trunk road as being material in most cases,
or a smaller percentage increase in locations where capacity is, or
is near to, being exceeded. The requirements for a Transport Assessment
for a particular development will need to be agreed with the relevant
highway authority. The DTLR policy on control of development near
trunk roads is set out in 'A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England',
July 1998 and PPG13 Annex B. |
| If areas are
identified where national air quality objective levels are expected
to be exceeded in 2005, authorities are required to declare Air Quality
Management Areas and develop action plans to deal with the exceedences.
Tameside in conjunction with the other Greater Manchester districts
carried out public consultation in January 2001 on the forecast areas
of likely exceedence and the Council declared an Air Quality Management
Area in the Borough on July 1st 2001. It should be easier to produce
an air quality assessment alongside a Transport Assessment because
a major factor is the amount and character of traffic generated. (See
also policy MW14) |
| |
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|