OLS Response | Frieze Farm
STATUS: OUTLINE APPLICATION
CLOSING DATE: 23rd July 2026
CONSULTATION PAGE: https://planningregister.cherwell.gov.uk/Planning/Display/26/00720/OUT
OLS PART 1 RESPONSE: click here
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Oxfordshire Liveable Streets has submitted its PART 1 response to Cherwell District Council’s consultation on proposed development of land at Frieze Farm, Frieze Way, Gosford OX2 8JX , addressing specifically transport matters; ES Chapter Transportation and ES Appendix 13.1, Transport Assessment Parts 1-8.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
This is one of the largest developments proposed in Oxfordshire and we object to the application on transport grounds.
This is a development of exceptional scale, generating substantial traffic, on a corridor that is already unsafe and severed, assessed in a way that does not test the harm where it would actually fall, and measured against a road safety policy the county has adopted and the assessment does not apply.
This response addresses transport only. We are aware that other respondents have raised serious concerns about the development on other grounds, including the data centre and its water consumption. We share those concerns and support those objections. Our focus here reflects our remit and expertise, not the limits of what is at stake with this application
Our position is constructive as well as critical. We have written this response as an opportunity to put right a set of long-standing transport failures on the A4165 corridor between Oxford and Kidlington, a corridor that should have been upgraded before any development along it was approved. A development of this scale is large enough to make a decisive contribution to that.
The key grounds
Vision Zero is not applied. The Transport Assessment does not mention the county's Vision Zero policy, and its Policy Context omits LTCP Policy 15, the policy that carries Oxfordshire's casualty reduction commitment.
Highway safety is not established. The assessment concludes there is "no inherent safety concern" at junctions including Cutteslowe, where a cyclist was seriously injured. Highway safety is a distinct ground for refusal under NPPF paragraph 116, and the assessment does not demonstrate that it is met.
The busiest routes into Oxford are excluded from assessment. Using IEMA screening thresholds, the assessment carries only five links forward and excludes 20 links and six junctions without explanation, among them Woodstock Road, Banbury Road inside the ring road, and Oxford Road through Kidlington. These carry the largest numbers of people walking, cycling and using buses. The harm is not tested where it would fall.
The corridor into Oxford is left untouched. The application promises "improved active travel links to Oxford city". What is proposed improves access to the site itself, leaves the Cutteslowe roundabout and the wider corridor unaddressed, and offers a canal towpath as the alternative for a site of this scale.
Key mitigation is not secured. Several active travel improvements are attributed to "either Oxford United Football Club New Stadium and/or the Proposed Development". The stadium is not consented, and mitigation that depends on an unconsented scheme cannot properly be credited.
What we are asking for
A full upgrade of the A4165 corridor between Oxford and Kidlington: continuous accessible footways, first-class separated cycling infrastructure, safe crossings, upgrades to the key junctions including Cutteslowe, and improved bus stops. As by far the largest scheme on the route, this development should be funding a significant contribution to that work.
Further parts of our response will follow, covering trip generation, parking quantum, and Decide and Provide compliance. To download our full PART 1 response: click here
