Travelodge hotel branch plan sparks fears over park-and-ride (From Oxford Mail)
Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting OXFORD NEWS to 80360 or email us
Travelodge hotel branch plan sparks fears over park-and-ride
1:20pm Monday 25th February 2013 in News
By Damian Fantato, covering Summertown, Jericho and North Oxford. Call me on 01865 425429
An artist's impression of the new branch
OXFORDSHIRE highways bosses have objected to plans for a Travelodge in Oxford because hotel guests could leave their cars at the nearby park-and-ride.
It is the second time the Thame-based budget hotel chain has tried to open a branch on the UK Bathroom Warehouse site next to Redbridge park-and-ride in Abingdon Road.
The first bid was thrown out by Oxford City Council in July because the building was too large and would dominate the area.
But this time Travelodge’s application for a £5.5m hotel in Abingdon Road has been opposed by Oxfordshire County Council.
The city council runs Redbridge park-and-ride, but the county council is the highways authority and says the 45-space car park for the 83-bedroom hotel would be too small.
Writing to the city council, Huw Jones, a principal engineer at the county council, said: “The location of the hotel being within easy reach of the A34, and the fact that it is 2km from the city centre and rail station, suggests most clients will arrive by car. The only car park open to the public in a reasonable distance from the proposed hotel is the park-and-ride facility.
“There is already pressure on the park-and-rides and some expansion has already taken place.”
Without a provision of one car-parking space for each of the hotel’s 83 bedrooms the county council would be objecting to the scheme.
The new building has been designed by Oxford-based Adrian James Architects, who were given the brief to “return to first principles and design from scratch a hotel”.
Travelodge says the building will create a “new gateway” to the city from the south.
In its travel plan for the hotel, Travelodge says: “Application of Oxford City Council's parking standards requires that a hotel provides one parking space for every two bedrooms.
“The development proposal will not provide more parking than is necessary.
“An over-supply of parking provision could be detrimental to the objectives of this travel plan by encouraging travel by private car.”
A decision will be made by a committee of city councillors at a date to be fixed.
Comments(15)
Myron Blatz
says...
2:59pm Mon 25 Feb 13
Dilligaf2010
says...
4:12pm Mon 25 Feb 13
xjohnx wrote:I think you've hit the nail on the head!
Oxford needs the hotel at it confirms to the councils own parking rules!!!
Objecting because hotel guests 'might' use the park and ride is stupid.
Are they going to object to my driving licence because I 'might' stop using the bus.
What a bunch of idiots we elected!!!
icba1957
says...
4:40pm Mon 25 Feb 13
The city council will gain extra revenue, the guests will have plenty of space to park, and everyone will be happy!
The city also probably insisted on a limited number of car parking spaces, and now that they've got what they want, they will refuse it anyway.
By the way, we don't elect council officers.
davyboy
says...
4:50pm Mon 25 Feb 13
davyboy
says...
4:52pm Mon 25 Feb 13
JanetJ
says...
6:36pm Mon 25 Feb 13
icba1957 wrote:But it isn't the City Council who are objecting is it? it's the County and it isn't even their car park is it? How does that work?
Has no-one realised that hotel guests generally stay at night, when the P&R site is usually empty?
The city council will gain extra revenue, the guests will have plenty of space to park, and everyone will be happy!
The city also probably insisted on a limited number of car parking spaces, and now that they've got what they want, they will refuse it anyway.
By the way, we don't elect council officers.
Andrew:Oxford
says...
7:00pm Mon 25 Feb 13
davyboy wrote:Oh it will. The competitor hotel at The Business Park just around the ring road has had near enough 100% occupancy since the day it opened.
and another point. the hotel will probably never have 83 rooms full anyway
The Redbridge P&R benefits in that it is a mere 20 minute walk to Cornmarket whereas it takes 45 minutes to walk to Cornmarket from the Business Park.
What I'm concerned about is that there doesn't seem to be an issue about guests of the Randolph or Malmaison leaving their cars at the P&R for the duration of their stay - just people in the economy hotels...
Alfie Nokes
says...
9:31pm Mon 25 Feb 13
Has the Four Pillars been at 100% occupancy since opening? (at least it'd be a yardstick from the same quarter)
Abingdon Neil
says...
1:22am Tue 26 Feb 13
Alfie Nokes
says...
3:44am Tue 26 Feb 13
Not sure I entirely agree with the words that somehow got in my mouth, despite your partial agreement with me...
"It is time to stop the rip-off back home, and The Travelodge might just do that on Abingdon Road.”
The Travelodge didn't do anything like on the Woodstock Road, why should it there?
But I really have no objections to the rip-offs stopping, regardless ;)
alu355
says...
11:47am Tue 26 Feb 13
Oxford desperately needs this type of hotel and the current location is not being well used and is a bit of an eyesore.
xjohnx
says...
2:44pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Alfie Nokes wrote:What planet please?
More claims that we need more hotels. I have yet to see any evidence of this need. All anecdotal evidence so far suggest the Abingdon Road is already served well enough.
Has the Four Pillars been at 100% occupancy since opening? (at least it'd be a yardstick from the same quarter)
Alfie Nokes
says...
6:29pm Tue 26 Feb 13
xjohnx wrote:thanks for insult and your evidence is?
Alfie Nokes wrote:What planet please?
More claims that we need more hotels. I have yet to see any evidence of this need. All anecdotal evidence so far suggest the Abingdon Road is already served well enough.
Has the Four Pillars been at 100% occupancy since opening? (at least it'd be a yardstick from the same quarter)
Alfie Nokes
says...
7:02am Wed 27 Feb 13
Are they really different?
Marlbourough House and NOA seem to be the only choice for the Woodstock Road - neither of them have single rooms advertised for less than £69 per night.
On the Abingdon Road, the "smallish B&Bs" can certainly accomodate more than either of the Woodstock Road B&Bs put together: The Ridings, Cornerways, Green Gables, Lakeside, Falcon. Sportsview, Newton House, and White House View, the cheapest advertised single rooms being £68 (and if you search them direct can find £55 single rooms - like the Falcon)
If there is a difference I would say that the Abingdon Road is better provisioned with all sizes (and I think at least three on that list would laugh out loud at being called "smallish" compared to the Marlborough House) of business that we risk putting out of business and leaving us similar to the poorer provision on Woodstock Road. At least as likely as your theory that they would drop prices (already being less than the ridiculous £75 you claimed they charged).
xjohnx says...
2:47pm Mon 25 Feb 13
Objecting because hotel guests 'might' use the park and ride is stupid.
Are they going to object to my driving licence because I 'might' stop using the bus.
What a bunch of idiots we elected!!!