Home › Forums › Forums › Latest News › Restrictions or possible permanent closure of Chilton Road, Upton
- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by TraceyA.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
February 11, 2014 at 1:51 pm #1995AnonymousInactive
A document with this heading has just been posted on STFC Chat. The new works proposed for the Chilton Interchange will (residents of this road, Upton to Hagbourne Hill feel) increase traffic. Options to mitigate this are below:
“Upton Parish Council will be taking a vote as to which option we should press Oxfordshire County
Council to adopt at a meeting in County Hall on the 21st February. This vote will be taken at the next
Parish Council meeting scheduled for 8:00pm on the 11th February at the village hall. If you would
like to express your views on the matter please do so either at the meeting or via email to
parish.council@uptonvillage.co.uk. ”Quote:
Possible options on the table to address these concerns would include:
A. Introduction of a chicane requiring traffic heading down into Upton to give way to traffic
heading up out of Upton;
B. Implementation of a one-way system with traffic allowed uphill only beyond the village
limits;
C. Road closure beyond the village limits, allowing for pedestrian, horse and cyclist access only.Each option is explored with its pro’s and con’s.
Option A
This would have the effect of reducing traffic speeds though the residential section of the village
while maintaining direct access to Chilton for all road users. However concerns “2” to “4” would not
be addressed. As such Option A would seem to address little of the concerns raised.Option B
Allowing through traffic in the uphill direction only, would have the benefit of halving the traffic flow
that Chilton Rd would otherwise experience. It would also reduce the average speed of the traffic, as
it is the downhill traffic that tends to travel the fastest.This option would also make road space for a dedicated cycle way to be implemented from the
village limits to the Hagbourne Hill Junction.As no traffic could make the right turn from Hagbourne Hill onto Chilton Rd there would be a
corresponding reduction in accidents stemming from this manoeuvre. Finally only 50% of journeys
that might otherwise use this route would be inconvenienced.Option B would go a long way to reduce current levels of traffic, regardless of any developments at
Chilton. It would also resolve most (not all) of the safety concerns, while presenting a compromise to
other road users.Option C
Total closure of Chilton Rd at the Hagbourne Hill Junction would solve all the traffic issues of
concern. However it would come at the cost of inconveniencing those that regularly use this road,
adding just under a mile to a daily commute.Option C clearly addresses all of the perceived problems that the Chilton development may bring.
There would also be major benefits to the properties on Chilton Rd, with a Cul-de-sac arrangement
greatly improving the amenity of the surroundings, making it would feel more like part of the village.
A narrowing of the entrance at Reading Rd could allow for the addition of a pedestrian crossing. This
would help reduce speeds and improve safety on the A417 while allowing this part of the village to
be better integrated into the wider village. -
February 11, 2014 at 1:55 pm #1997AnonymousInactive
It seems to me that, while option C is superficially attractive to cyclists, the increased traffic coming up the hill at the junction would make crossing hazardous and long-winded. Option B on the other hand would seem an ideal compromise, especially with an added dedicated cycleway.
-
February 24, 2014 at 12:50 pm #2025dimitrisMember
Last week signs indicating that the road will be closed from 5th March have been placed. Does that mean option C was selected and the road will remain available for cyclists?
Cheers,
-
February 24, 2014 at 1:09 pm #2026TraceyAMember
According to Vale of the White Horse District Council , it’s being closed for 5 days for urgent coring and survey work and will re-open after.
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.