Return to Agenda

 

ITEM EX18

THE EXECUTIVE - 23 JULY 2002

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RELOCATION OF SS PHILIP AND JAMES C of E FIRST SCHOOL, OXFORD

Report by Director of Environmental Services

Introduction

  1. As part of the Oxford Schools Reorganisation and to cater for the needs of local development the First School will transfer to a Primary School on a site north of Aristotle Lane. Planning consent for a 14 class primary school, in Navigation Way, was granted in June 2001. The consent included conditions, as set out in Annex 1, that required various traffic management arrangements to be implemented before the school could be occupied. This report outlines the informal consultation undertaken to date on possible traffic management measures and proposes a preferred option for formal consultation and implementation.

  2. The new school, which is required to open in October 2002 will initially be limited to accommodate a maximum of 180 children until such time as the proposed spine road from Woodstock Road becomes available.

    3. Development of Proposals and Consultation with SS Philip and James

  3. The County Council’s Engineering Consultant, Babtie, produced an initial design that took into account planning conditions set out in Annex 1,. That design provided two rising bollards in Aristotle Lane, at its junction with Kingston Road, to control access into Aristotle Lane during school arrival and departure times. This option was discussed at a meeting in March 2002 with the Buildings Sub-Group of SS Philip and James Governors.

  4. The Group expressed some concerns about the proposals and made suggestions that they considered should be explored to improve the safety of children accessing Aristotle Lane and crossing the bridge. These suggestions included an alternative location for the rising bollards. The Governing Body’s concerns are set out in Annex 2 together with officer comments made at the time.

  5. Following that meeting some changes were made to the initial design and another meeting held with the Buildings Sub-Group in May 2002. Concerns were again expressed about the safety of children (walking and cycling) mixing with motor traffic on the bridge. Officers consider that this cannot be totally avoided without closing the bridge, which is not possible, as it is the only exit from a housing estate. The issue of whether the restriction point should be in Aristotle Lane or in Kingston Road was once again raised. Officers agreed to look at this again and if a solution could be found to remove the possibility of vehicles trying to turn round within the immediate vicinity of the restriction point to include this in a subsequent informal consultation.

    6. Options for Consultation

  6. Consultation has been undertaken on two options for restricting access into Aristotle Lane. Option 1 provides a restriction point in Aristotle Lane, at its junction with Kingston Road. Option 2 provides a restriction point between Aristotle Lane and Polstead Road. These are shown in Annex 3, which is the consultation leaflet delivered to properties in the immediate area and directly affected by the proposals. Also shown in the leaflet is proposed traffic calming in surrounding roads.

  7. The suggestion that the restriction point be located in Kingston Road between Aristotle Lane and Polstead Road was reviewed. The problem of parents setting down their children at the restriction point and carrying out a three point turn can be overcome by restricting motor vehicle access into Kingston Road, at its junction with St. Margaret’s Road, ie a restriction on northbound movements. The provision of this additional constraint means that any parent that still wishes to set down their child near to the restriction in Kingston Road will have to approach it via Polstead Road and then turn southward, thereby removing the need to carry out a three point turn.

    8. Results of Consultation

  8. The consultation leaflet, Annex 3, was delivered to approximately 250 properties on 14 June. Over 200 leaflets were also distributed via SS Philip and James School to parents. A meeting with representatives of residents’ association, in the area, was held on 25 June.

  9. At the time of writing this report 28 individuals/organisation had responded. Their comments are summarised in Annex 4. Copies of the original letters/e-mails have been placed in the Members’ Resource Centre.

  10. The majority of those commenting preferred Option 1. However, many of those who did prefer this option raised concerns about the safety of pedestrians and cyclists who will be using the bridge and mixing with motor traffic. Those concerns have now been addressed in revised proposals.

    11. Revised Proposals

  11. Revised proposals for controlling access into Aristotle Lane and traffic management in the surrounding roads are shown on plan Nos BPN823/F3262 and BPN823/B3200. Copies of the plan have been placed in the Members’ Resource Centre and will also be on display at the meeting.

  12. Changes that have been incorporated include additional traffic calming in Aristotle Lane, either side of the bridge, traffic calming in Navigation Way and provision of a footway linking the footpath from the recreation ground to the school site (although this will be dependent on the purchase or dedication of land). It is also recommended that an additional School Crossing Patrol be provided at the Kingston Road/Polstead Road junction to assist children to cross these roads.

    13. Other Issues

  13. The school is expected to be completed in October. The school have indicated that they wish to occupy the new site as soon as possible.

  14. To ensure that the traffic management measures are in place for the opening of the school, it will be necessary to order the rising bollard equipment before results of the further consultation are known. By ordering the equipment early, before the end of July, there is a risk that the comments received from the formal consultation will be such that the proposals are not proceeded with. The rising bollard equipment, which is estimated at £45,000, would then need to be stored for possible use at a future site.

    15. Financial and Staff Implications

  15. The staffing implications can be met from existing resources. The measures are to be funded from the Oxford School Reorganisation Programme. The cost of an additional School Crossing Patrol can be met from existing budgetary provision.

    16.  

    RECOMMENDATIONS

  16. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to:

          1. agree to formal consultation being undertaken on the revised proposals shown on plan nos BPN823/F3262 and BPN823/B3200 and to authorise the Director of Environmental Services, in consultation with the Executive Members for the Transport and Strategic Planning & Waste Management and Local Member(s), to implement the measures subject to the consideration of any representations or objections resulting from the consultation;

          2. authorise officers to order the rising bollard equipment in advance of the formal consultation;

          3. agree to the provision of an additional School Crossing Patrol.

DAVID YOUNG
Director of Environmental Services

Background papers: Letter of comment on file number 12.6.320

Contact Officer: John Cramer Tel: Oxford 815963

18 July 2002