At their meeting on 3 November 2014 the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of the Cabinet Member of Environment made on 9 October 2014 following proper notice of call in. The Committee agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet for it to consider in the light of the following aspects of the decision:
(a) That neither the Officers report nor the Cabinet Members decision appeared to be based on the Department for Transport Guidance into the assessment of pedestrian crossing sites and;
(b) The Cabinet Member did not take due account of the impact of the changes on the wider local traffic network.
The report before cabinet asks Members to consider the proposal in the round and specifically responds to the challenges from Scrutiny Committee.
Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:
(a)
approve implementation of proposals for two
proposed Pelican crossings on A415 Marcham Road and Ock
Street, Abingdon as advertised and
(b)
(if approved) ask officers to monitor
closely the safety performance and traffic delays following the completion of
the works.
Minutes:
At their meeting
on 3 November 2014 the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision
of the Cabinet Member of Environment made on 9 October 2014 following proper
notice of call in. The Committee agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet
for it to consider in the light of the following aspects of the decision:
(a) That neither the Officers report nor the
Cabinet Members decision appeared to be based on the Department for Transport
Guidance into the assessment of pedestrian crossing sites and;
(b) The Cabinet Member did not take due
account of the impact of the changes on the wider local traffic network.
Cabinet had before them a report
that asked Members to consider all previous papers for the proposal as well as the
current report and specifically to respond to the challenges from Scrutiny
Committee. Cabinet also had before them the petition submitted by Councillor. Samantha Bowring,
Town Councillor for Ock Meadow Ward.
Roger Bush, speaking against the decision of the Cabinet
Member for Environment made on 9 October 2014 explained the context of the
decision within the planning framework and the current position with regard to
planning applications. He commented that with the National Planning Policy
Framework local control had been lost. He stated that he saw no sense in the
decision on road safety or traffic grounds. He refuted that there would be no
impact and believed that there would be adverse traffic consequences with
lengthened queues. Mr Bush questioned the competence and integrity of officers,
which statements were strongly refuted by Cabinet who noted that they were hard
working, professional and experienced individuals.
Anthea Turner,
queried the purpose of the changes when the Town Council and residents did not
want them and in her view they were not designed to improve traffic. The County
Council was afraid of being sued but it was clear that if the measures proved
impossible to proceed then the development cannot continue. She expressed doubt
over the modelling that had taken place and asserted that the changes would
cause massive hold ups on Drayton Road.
Dr Jim Halliday, spoke against the
proposals highlighting congestion and queues leading to air quality issues.
Andy Cattermole, Taylor Wimpey, spoke in support of the
report from officers and asked that Cabinet follow its recommendations.
Councillor Constance, speaking as a a
signatory to the call in expressed concern over increased congestion and argued
that the Highways Authority had not exercised its powers to examine the wider
congestion that she felt would be the result of the changes.
Councillor Neil Fawcett, speaking as a local councillor and
as the originator of the call in stated that the views expressed reflected that
the process followed was not trusted and was seen to be led by the planning
decision rather than being arrived at objectively. He supported comments from
Councillor Constance around congestion in the wider area. Referring to an
assessment of safety he considered that the County Council had not done a
proper assessment of the safest point taking into account the desire line of
pedestrians. He added that a basic principle in the guidelines was that
pedestrian safety was a prime factor.
Councillor Lovatt, speaking as a signatory of the call in,
noted that as a member of the Vale of White Horse District Council and Deputy
Chairman of the Planning Committee he would not be making any comment on the
development. He was also Leader of Abingdon Town Council. He expressed surprise
at the amount of analysis of air quality in the report,
felt that it was insufficient to show the impact it would have and that it
would lead to problems. He referred to strategic developments in the area that
would be impacted by traffic problems in Abingdon.
Responding to a question from a cabinet member on why he
expected the level of congestion to get worse Councillor Lovatt referred to the
original objection from the Highways Authority and felt that nothing had
changed.
Councillor Nimmo Smith introduced
the contents of the report and supporting papers including the addenda. In
moving the recommendations he highlighted the conclusions set out in paragraphs
27-30.
In response to a question from the Leader, Cabinet was
advised that, whilst the call in raised two specific issues Cabinet was being
asked to re-consider the proposals in full and not just on the two issues.
Mark Kemp, Deputy Director, Commercial and David Tole, Principal
Engineer-Traffic & Safety Improvement set out the history of the matter. They
commented that the Council had objected on traffic grounds to the planning
application but had failed. The advice they had received was that unless
something substantially different had come forward that the Planning Inspector’s
decision could not be challenged. They explained that the report set out in
detail how the guidance had been used and noted that the guidance did not
address the scenario of moving crossings. Desire lines were heavily influenced
in this scenario by the existing crossing. The report also set out how traffic
congestion was addressed. Anthony Kirkwood, Assistant Principal Engineer, advised on
the safety audit procedure that had been followed.
Mark Kemp and David Tole responded to
detailed questions from Cabinet Members that included: confirming that the Police
had been consulted as part of the consultation, accepting
that there would be some increase in congestion at the junction but not a
significant increase. Monitoring of schemes after
implementation was normal and in line with guidance. Mark Kemp added
that it was a difficult process and their consultation looked for substantive
new information and had found nothing that had changed the position that had
informed the Planning Inspector’s decision.
During discussion Cabinet Members
supported the recommendations commenting that the process had been meticulously
followed, as evidenced in the detailed papers in front of them. They
particularly highlighted paragraph 27 of the report.
RESOLVED: to:
(a) approve implementation of proposals for two proposed Pelican crossings on A415 Marcham Road and Ock Street, Abingdon as advertised and
(b) (if approved) ask officers to monitor closely the safety performance and traffic delays following the completion of the works.
Supporting documents: