PN040405-05-sjp-an2

Division affected: Wolvercote

PLANNING & REGULATION COMMITTEE –
4 APRIL 2005

Detailed Background

In 2000 the County Council approved the planning application for this 14 class school and nursery, which was proposed on land allocated for education use in the Oxford Local Plan.

The intention was that the school would become a replacement for the inadequate first school site at Leckford Road. It was also intended to become a full Primary School as part of the ‘City Schools Reorganisation’ from a three tier to a two tier system.

However, due to limitations on the access available to the new school with its only vehicular access over the hump backed single track bridge, consent was granted for the complete school to be built, but with a condition restricting it to a maximum of 180 pupils. This was the number calculated at the time, to equate to the highway capacity of the bridge at the start and end of the school day.

The consent also required: a) bollards to be installed in the carriageway east of the canal bridge to control traffic. These would operate at the start and the end of the school day to prevent pupils being delivered and collected by car; b) a School Travel Plan to be provided to promote sustainable methods of travel; and c) a school shuttle bus service to collect children from the catchment area and from the Leckford Road school site. This site remained in school use because of the restriction on numbers allowed at the new school.

The Local Plan also allocated land between the school site and the canal for housing, as well as part of the Trap Grounds to the North. All this development is intended to be served by the ‘spine road’ in the Plan which links it to the Woodstock Road.

It is also intended that when the ‘spine road’ is built, that the canal bridge will be closed to all traffic except for cyclists, pedestrians and emergency vehicles. The planning restriction on pupil numbers will also be lifted when the ‘spine road’ is provided.

By 2003 planning consent had been granted for social housing on part of the ‘Trap Grounds’ north of the school, including a ‘spine road’ linking the school and adjoining housing development to the highway network to the north.

However, an application had also been made to designate the ‘Trap Grounds’ including the area proposed for the social housing and its road, as a ‘Town/Village Green’. Such a designation, if approved would effectively prohibit any development on the designated land. Consequently the pupil capacity limitation for the new school remains in force.

As a result of pressures from growth in pupil numbers and severe difficulties in managing the split site school, an application was made in 2003 for temporary planning consent to increase pupil numbers to 330 until July 2006 by which time it was hoped that the ‘spine road’ would be provided. This application would enable the whole school to be consolidated on the new school site.

The application was accompanied by a Traffic Impact Assessment and proposed a range of highway improvements aimed at making the local highway network suitable for the increased numbers.

The highway improvements included: a) improved highway access to the canal bridge and beside Aristotle Lane and at its junction with Navigation Way, b) the addition of the traffic lights to control movements over Aristotle Bridge, c) new crossings to Aristotle Lane, d) removal of some parking spaces in Aristotle Lane and e) relocation of the cycle link junction between the towpath and Aristotle Lane from a blind junction beside the bridge parapet.

The application was approved subject to conditions: a) requiring the highway works to be carried out, b) the School Travel Plan updated and, c) the shuttle bus continuing to be provided. These conditions applied only until such time as the ‘spine road’ is provided.

The Town/Village Green application was heard at the Court of Appeal in January this year and judgment was delivered on 24 February. Among other things, the judgment held that the County Council was only able to register the land as a ‘Green’ if use of the land for lawful sports and purposes continued ‘as of right’ up to the date of registration. This judgment is clear and now would allow the County Council to proceed with the registration process. However the applicant for the Town Green registration who felt differently about the judgment has a right to seek leave to appeal to the House of Lords and has 28 days from the date of the judgment in which to do so.’ If there is no appeal then the County Council will also need to contact their Inspector again to obtain his recommendation as to how the evidence given in the Inquiry should be considered having regard to the legal position as stated by the Court of Appeal.

When the land for the school was purchased, there was a legal agreement between the City and County Councils which allowed the City Council to exercise a land exchange between their land and land owned by the County Council. The two areas concerned are both adjacent to the school and are marked on the plan with this report.

The County owns the land forming the northern part of the school site which the City Council will require if it is able to implement its housing permission on the land adjacent. The City Council own the land shown to the south of the school which it would want to exchange with the land to the north.

However, a claim has been made that there is a public right of way across the City land, which leads to allotments on the other side of the railway. This claim is going through the process of investigation and determination. If the claim is upheld this will delay the land exchange because the County Council will only take part in the exchange if the land is unencumbered. If the footpath is confirmed, then it would need to be diverted before the land could be exchanged.

At present neither area of land is included within the school boundaries. This is a concern because of the limited amount of space available to the school. A new spine road providing alternative safe access to the school cannot be built until these issues are resolved. In the meantime the existing canal bridge is the only means of access to the school site.

The bollards are a key part of the traffic controls over the canal bridge. They are intended to operate between 08.00 and 09.15 and 14.30 to 15.35 during school days. Only residents of the housing beside the school and school staff have swipe cards to gain access over the bridge. Entry by other persons is controlled remotely by Control Plus via CCTV and telephone links.

When the bollards were first installed they suffered a series of failures. It is hoped the problems have now been cured with the introduction of an alternative telephone link.

The School Travel Plan which has been directed at reducing reliance on the car as a means of taking pupils to school has been particularly successful. Surveys have shown that whilst some 64% of pupils were delivered by car to the former school site in November 2002, this proportion had fallen to 16% by November 2004. Reduction in car use has been complemented by an increase in cycling from 9% to 34% and in walking from 23% to 29%. A significant but varying number of pupils also arrived by school bus.

The County Council’s accident statistics show that there have only been two accidents in the vicinity of the school sites in the last 5 years. These were both at the junction of St Margaret’s Road with the Woodstock Road and the severity of the accidents was recorded as slight.

Return to TOP