Counciller Robin Parker has sent me a copy of the minutes of the meeting of “of Development Control Committee spokespersons and local members”. This meeting was closed to the public.
Of note is the answer to the question as to why was it not possible to delay part of the Lonsdale construction to allow demolition of the old Marriotts school and demolition traffic to access via the much wider and usually uncluttered Brittain Way?
1) The extra cost.
2) The head teachers wanted to open both the schools together.
Minutes of Meeting of presentation of information about demolition access at Marriotts School,Telford Avenue,Stevenage.
Date: 11 March 2011,10:00am at County Hall,Hertford
Attendees:
- Bryan Hammond,Chair,Development Control Committee
- Bill Storey,Development Control Committee
- Robin Parker,Local County Councillor
- John Usher,Vice Chair,Development Control Committee
- Vetti Vettivelu,Team Leader,Highways Development Management
- Tony Shepherd
- Melanie Kilminster
- Nigel Dickens
- Andrew Baker
- Chay Dempster,Principal Planning Officer
- Brian Owen,Team Leader,Development Management
- Bob Meadows,Assistant Network Manager,Herts Highways
1 Apologies:
- Sharon Taylor,Development Control Committee
- Geoff Churchard,Development Control Committee
Bryan Hammond agreed to chair the meeting.
2. Purpose of the meeting:
Chay Dempster outlined the purpose of the meeting which was to look at issues relating to plans for access for the demolition traffic and details of noise attenuation associated with the construction of the new school at Marriotts and Lonsdale.
(i) Demolition access:
The demolition access was part of a phase of works at Marriotts to take place from September 2012 to March 2013. All other traffic would now be making use of the new access formed off of Brittain Way.
Nigel Dickens outlined the proposals for managing traffic. The old school was to be demolished and was roughly in the footprint of the new all weather sports pitch. The old school was to be demolished after the new Marriotts community school had been constructed and pupils have moved to the new school. However the position of the new school meant that there was not room for demolition traffic to move around the new schools to get to the access at Brittain Way. He explained that they had approached Veolia Water about crossing the two main pipelines which ran through the site. The pipes are sensitive as they are constructed with cast metal and lead joints. In addition at the point where they change direction south west of the new school building they are major constructions thrusts joints to cope with pressure along the pipeline which are particularly sensitive. Veolia advised against any building over the pipelines and would not provide a construction standard for any works over the pipeline. They had investigated the line of the pipe with trial pits and now had the route accurately plotted. This meant that access along the west of the school was not possible.
Robin Parker asked a number of questions about the proposal.
Robin –why was it not possible to delay part of the Lonsdale construction to allow demolition of the old Marriotts school and demolition traffic to access via Brittain Way?
Nigel replied that as the project was a PFI and public funded costs were very strictly controlled,the delay in construction of Lonsdale would cost a lot more and could not be justified.
Melanie Kilminster added that the head teachers had said that they wished to open both the schools together to aid integration and help manage the change.
Robin asked why the route across Fairlands Valley Park had been discounted.
Melanie replied that a route had been discussed with Aidan Sanderson,who had briefed Nick Parry of Stevenage Borough Council. SBC had said they had major concerns about the route,which was along the boundary of Fairlands Valley and across to the buildings that include the changing rooms and facilities at the water sports centre and then south to Six Hills Way.
Robin asked if compensation had been offered to SBC.
Melanie confirmed that compensation had been offered in the form of offers to undertake any works in the Park and offer of compensation from PFI funds was not available.
Robin asked about the proposed hours and why there were exclusions from the proposals between 8-9am and 5-6pm.
Nigel replied that the exclusion was put forward in order to avoid times when people would be going to and from work,and clarified that this did not relate to the school as its access was separate.
Bryan Hammond asked if any visual inspection had taken place to verify the hours were right.
It was confirmed that an inspection had taken place and photographic records were available.
Bob Meadows summarised that it was hoped to avoid the use of TRO. Consultation should be carried out by letter drops asking people to park on one side of the road.
Robin asked if there would be more than one traffic marshal.
Andrew confirmed that there would be more than one traffic marshal and they would be in contact with each other via radio to co-ordinate lorry movements including crossing points.
Robin asked for clarification.
Andrew clarified that this was at the site entrance.
Bryan asked if deliveries would be turned away.
Andrew said they would probably accept the deliveries once arrived but not allow the driver back again.
Bryan asked for clarification on whether the table of lorries related to movements or number of vehicles.
It was clarified that this was number of lorries and movements would therefore be double the number shown in the table.
Chay asked what certainty could be applied to the predictions.
Andrew replied that the calculations had been carried out for all vehicle types. The movements would be 30 at peak. The timetable would exclude Saturdays and Sundays for vehicle movements,though contractors may work on site over this time. Over Christmas they would close but probably not for whole 2 weeks.
John Usher asked if there would be a weight limit,whether a vehicle wash would be used and if vehicles would be sheeted.
Andrew,there would not be weight limit imposed. It would follow national limits though many of the vehicles would be rigid 8 wheel tippers. There would be a vehicle wash and sheeting of vehicles.
Bob said that there were some evidences of over run and road damage and the demolition traffic may bring failure of the road forward.
Vetti Vettivelu suggested that an extraordinary survey of the road condition should be carried out before the demolition route was used.
Bob suggested that it might be best to ‘patch out’ in key places prior to the start of the contract. A key area was the junction of Telford Avenue and Newton Road. He suggested notices on lamp posts would be a good way increasing awareness of issues.
Robin asked if a meeting could be held to explain what would be happening.
It was confirmed that this would happen.
Bob informed the meeting of the proposal by Stevenage Borough to introduce a parking scheme. This should be in place by the time the demolition works start.
Bob asked if the lorries can be identified.
Andrew said that lorries will be identified by cards and numbered.
Bob,there will be the need to hold vehicles away from Chells Way.
Andrew said that a holding bay would be found and radios would be used to hold vehicles. Contact details for questions about vehicles would be provided.
(ii) Acoustic Fencing:
Andrew –A plan was tabled giving the location of acoustic fencing. Along the eastern boundary the fencing was to be 2m high.
Robin asked if fencing could be considered along the northern boundary. Also boundary treatment along Priestly Road needs to take accounts of concerns to maintain views.
John asked if the lighting plans would be considered in details.
Chay confirmed lighting plans would be sent to the Environment and Commercial Services Lighting Engineer.
Chay would liaise with Robin Parker over details of fencing on the northern boundary and further treatment would be considered here.
Bill Storey said that the plans relied upon voluntary compliance with parking along Telford Avenue and Newton Road what would happen if this did not occur.
Bob said that the police had powers and emergency TROs could be considered.
Members considered that the proposals represented the best option available and awaited further details of the proposals following points raised.
Latest Comments