Can you see anything wrong with the Site Location Plan (below) that compares the Bishopbriggs High School site and the Thomas Muir site? Why has the entire site at Thomas Muir been highlighted but only the school at Bishopbriggs High?
Surly not to make one site look larger than the other!
Reproduced under the terms of Faber Maunsell "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" as published on their web site.
The plan indicates that Accident data has been requested from East Dunbartonshire Council but has NOT been provided.
(Page15 3.8)
Another interesting point was the bus journeys to school taken by pupils of Bishopbriggs High School and Thomas Muir before amalgamation.
Bishopbriggs High 5% (around 50 pupils) used the bus to get to school
Thomas Muir High 35% (around 200 pupils) used the bus to get to school
Thomas Muir had only 480 pupils (same report) my maths make 200 pupils around 42% not 35% or almost half.
Does that show it's more difficult to access this site?
The plan also agrees that Bishopbriggs Railway Station is now outside the Scottish Executive guidelines - that the acceptable walking distance for rail stations to a place of education or place of employment is 800m. Therefore, rail travel is not considered a viable transport mode for pupils or staff of Bishopbriggs Academy.
Not the case if the High School site had been agreed as public consultation wished.
Amazingly on page 20 the another map indicates bus stops and shelters. One of the stops is marked on the bus terminus which may not exist as it's part of the 'surplus' land the developers want to sell!
East Dunbartonshire Council policy on dealing with traffic impacts of new development is
provided in their memo of 18 January 2005 provided in Appendix B.
Under traffic impact...
During the time of writing, utilities works in Bishopbriggs Town Centre on Kirkintilloch Road
have been underway and this will have a significant impact on the traffic patterns within
Bishopbriggs as a whole. Therefore, it has not been possible to obtain any meaningful survey
data in the vicinity of the Thomas Muir site and no historic data was available either.
Importantly, the roads memo states...
“The implication of the above is that traffic capacity issues should not be used as a reason for refusing a planning application which the Planning Service is minded to grant….”
Two access options are proposed - as far as I am aware - no decision has been made on planning approval for the new school. I am also aware that work has started to create an access point indicated on one of the options.
Has the work has started before approval.
Worryingly on page 38
7.6.3.5 Rail Measures
Milngavie rail station is 1.6km walk from the school is above the maximum walking threshold
figure of 800m specified by the Scottish executive.
"Milngavie rail station" Same plan used for different schools or what?
Happy New Year
2007
1 comment:
From InspirED's own travel plan document...
"Service vehicles should also be segregated from pupils. In many cases they will access a
different part of the school from pupil entrances and should have separate entrances where
possible."
The Thomas Muir site fails to provide this as pupils on foot, teachers, taxis, parents in cars and delivery vehicles can only access the site through one entrance/exit.
Back to the drawing boards eh?
Post a Comment