Church Way bollards at Botley Centre, West Way, Botley, Oxford

What was proposed

Collapsible bollards would restrict vehicles at both ends of Church Way, with fixed bollards, double yellow lines and improved signs to deter parking.

“PROPOSAL 2.1 This application proposes collapsible bollards across Church Way at the northern and southern end to restrict vehicular access and additional bollards on either side of the carriageway to prevent vehicles mounting the kerb. Improved signage, double yellow lines and lettering on the road is also proposed to further deter vehicles from parking and to advise them of the restricted access.”

“The original proposals were for gates at both ends of Church Way but amended plans deleted these gates in favour of collapsible bollards.”

Officer report

The site and its use

Church Way is a private road through West Way Square, linking West Way and Arthray Road, with car park accesses and a central walkway nearby.

“The application site is part of Church Way, within West Way Square, a mixed- use development in Botley. Church Way links West Way to the north and Arthray Road to the south. At the southern part of the site are accesses to car parks to the east and west. Elms Parade is to the north and the central walkway through West Way Square is to the east.”

“Church Way is a private road owned by the applicant. The approved Servicing and Delivery Management Plan approved under P19/V2088/DIS and the Technical Note 16 submitted with the permission for the wider Botley West Way development state that Church Way will be closed to vehicular traffic between 10.00 and 16.00. The approved method for controlling this is the use of ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition).”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and restrictions

Earlier permissions approved the wider development, a servicing and delivery plan, CCTV and ANPR, and a parking strategy affecting Church Way.

“P19/V2425/DIS Discharge of conditions 24 - CCTV and ANPR and 28 - Car parking strategy to application P19/V0416/FUL.”

“P16/V0246/FUL Demolition and redevelopment of existing shopping centre and adjacent buildings (but excluding Elms Parade) for new retail development (Use Classes A1-A5) at ground floor level, with development above comprising 140 residential units (C3), 123 bedroom hotel (C1) and 261 units of academic residential accommodation for university staff and students (sui generis).”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because physical barriers would enforce existing restrictions, improve the pedestrian experience and provide no material planning harm, subject to conditions.

“Principle of development/compliance with vision for the development The principle of additional measures to enforce the existing restrictions on vehicles is supported by the planning conditions which require them and policy CP11 which required the redevelopment to prioritise the pedestrian customer environment.”

“With this condition imposed, following the submission of the amended plans, officers consider that there will be no harm to highway safety from the development and it will bring material benefits in terms of improving the pedestrian experience of the development. Improving the pedestrian experience of the development is also likely to cause other benefits which flow from this including encouraging sustainable travel to the site and visitors more generally.”

Officer report

Residents’ and councillor views

Objections concerned accessibility, safety, parking, enforcement, community events, visual impact and whether ANPR should be used instead.

“Representation Comments Councillor Emily Smith First consultation – 20/04/25 Objection ‘The key material planning reasons for my objection are: • Non-compliance with the Botley Supplementary Planning Document in the Vale’s adopted Local Plan and Neighbourhood Development Plan – protecting community use of our ‘Town Square’ • Viability • Access for emergency vehicles • Safety of pedestrians using Church Way • Enforcement…”

“Local residents First consultation Objection (14) • Vehicles should be banned 24 hours a day • Obstruction to cyclists and pedestrians including those with reduced mobility • Concerns about operation of the gates • Development would be visually intrusive • The only bollards necessary are those at each of the entrances, adjacent to the 2 lockable gates • ANPR should be used instead • Bollards will reduce the utility of the space for holding community events • Church Way…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A parish councillor spoke against the application, and two ward councillors spoke on it.

Members’ debate

Members discussed accessibility, phased works, fixed bollards, restricted hours, ANPR, emergency access and management of the bollards.

“Members queried whether a phased approach to implementation could be considered, beginning with the installation of bollards at the northern and southern ends of Church Way, followed by internal works at a later stage. The Officer advised that the application was not submitted as a phased development and that approving only part of the scheme would not be best practice.”

“Concerns were raised about the necessity of the fixed bollards and whether they could be omitted. The Officer explained that the fixed bollards were intended to prevent vehicles from mounting the kerb and parking within the site, particularly during hours when vehicular access was permitted. Their inclusion was considered justified in terms of pedestrian safety and maintaining the integrity of the restricted area.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to approve the application was moved, seconded and carried.

“A motion, moved and seconded to approve the application was carried on being put to the vote.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application subject to commencement, approved-plan and access-management conditions.

“RESOLVED: to approve planning application P25/V0640/FUL subject to the following conditions:”

“Standard 1. Commencement within 3 yrs 2. Approved plans Prior to first use 3. Access Management Plan…”

Minutes