Curbridge Preservation Society

Working to Protect Our Natural and Built Environment

30mph not 40mph (or more)

Due to consistent speeding and ever increasing traffic movements on the A3051 through Curbridge, this little conurbation must be protected with a 30mph speed limit, no matter whether it complies with the constraints of 'Village 30' or not. Existing traffic noise and vibration measurements must be taken and acted upon and air quality measured.

The last time traffic monitoring was undertaken in Curbridge there were 1500 speeding offences occurring a day – and yet the Police and councillors refused to do any enforcement or real traffic calming. Having said they would visibly narrow the bridge by white lining they reneged on this as to do so would ‘visibly narrow the bridge’! This bridge has had to partially rebuilt twice in three years due to collisions and is in need of repair yet again due to vehicle collisions.

Transport Infrastructure - With the MDA - our Feedback to WCC

  • Employment centres are Southampton, Portsmouth and Winchester - only 20% of Whiteley residents work in Whiteley.

We believe that the transport infrastructure is and will remain inadequate to support this proposed development; with the proposed infrastructure expenditure at A3051/A334 being totally inadequate and the impacts being without possible mitigation; therefore making it unsustainable and in conflict with PPS12.

Local Road and Strategic Road Networks do not have the capacity for any increase in local traffic from a 3000-3500 dwelling development in Curbridge that will drastically affect both Botley and the surrounding area. 3000 – 3500 more houses will create approximately 5000 extra cars.

We also are aware of WCC’s own issues with the Preferred Option… Urban Extensions 3.59 Finally, Winchester City Council prefers Option 1, but only if matched by infrastructure, particularly: Whiteley Way/Botley Bypass…” (PUSH - South Hampshire Sub-regional Strategy: Background Document 2,  Housing)

It is known from the TfSH report that there is ‘no justification’ for a Botley Bypass so the constraints to the local road network at Botley will remain set by the bridge. It is also known that the Whiteley Way is going to be designed as anything but a high capacity distributor road.

  • Delivering Strategies’ Winchester District Local Development Framework Transport Assessment (Stage 2 Report) Final Report for Winchester City Council, November 2009, Chapter 5, North of Whiteley: .5.4.5 With additional development, there will clearly be impacts on the M27, as shown in Figure 5.1 – 636 vehicles in AM Peak to the east of Junction 9 and over 488 to the west. In addition, a further 422 will be using the junction to gain access to routes to the south adding to congestion here and at Segensworth Roundabout. Given the congestion already experienced here, this level of additional demand is unsustainable and will require significant mitigation.” This same report also indicated a further 500 cars in the a.m. peak hour at King’s Corner (A3051/A334).
  • Whiteley – from the same profile seem to demonstrate that only 20% of working residents are employed in Whiteley therefore 80% of potential, working, residents in the proposed MDA will probably be travelling out of the settlement and using either strategic or local road networks.

At the present time traffic, in the peak a.m. hour, is queued back to Fairthorne Manor (YMCA) every morning a distance of ½ mile from the King’s Corner (A334) junction; this will only dramatically worsen let alone when there is an incident on the M27 between Junctions 9 and 5 (as often happens). In future this will stretch back into ‘Great Curbridge’ and through Curbridge itself. This will be unsustainable.

£250k of traffic mitigation will not ease this neither will £100k in Botley. £1M of road improvements on the A3051 north of the Whiteley Way to the A334 is of little consequence to stationary traffic.

Botley itself has natural constraints to its traffic capacity caused by the bridge over the river and exacerbated by the pedestrian crossing at the primary school. Botley is currently at saturation levels of traffic in the morning and evening peak hours and at capacity many other times of the day.

If the Whiteley extension performs in line with historic Whiteley statistics, rather than planners’ aspirations, there will still be a 75-80% of out-commuting to work in Southampton/Winchester/ Eastleigh and Portsmouth. We therefore believe that the increase in traffic exiting onto the A3051 will actually be significantly more than the proposed 500 cars (0800-0900) morning peak and is more likely to be in the area of 1000+. [488 vehicles predicted to use Junction 9 going to Southampton – we would expect them to join the M27 at Junction 7 – why go backwards and join a saturated motorway 2 junctions earlier and sit in even more traffic before junction 7?]

Access to Junction 7 will be preferred to Junction 9 for Southampton based workers as the A27 into Southampton is also at saturation levels in the morning and evening peak hours.

Without a Botley Bypass any significant increase in traffic levels would be totally unsustainable.

  • It is unlikely that there will be adequate revenue funding available to subsidise projected bus transport provision given government cut-backs to county and local authorities; so those aspirations of significantly increased but subsidised bus services will be unlikely to come to fruition.

The second exit of Whiteley was always proposed to be north of Curbridge; however recent plans show a further exit south of the hamlet’s hub which will further impact on the ability of residents to have peaceful enjoyment of their property and affect their safety as road users - as pedestrians, riding horses or on bicycles.

No traffic calming/ offset proposals for the centre of Curbridge have been suggested in the infrastructure plan. This is unacceptable if the Master Plan is to be seen through with this ‘south of Curbridge’ ingress/egress point.