Agenda item

Questions from County Councillors

Any county councillor may, by giving notice to the Proper Officer by 9 am two working days before the meeting, ask a question on any matter in respect of the Cabinet’s delegated powers.

 

The number of questions which may be asked by any councillor at any one meeting is limited to two (or one question with notice and a supplementary question at the meeting) and the time for questions will be limited to 30 minutes in total. As with questions at Council, any questions which remain unanswered at the end of this item will receive a written response.

 

Questions submitted prior to the agenda being despatched are shown below and will be the subject of a response from the appropriate Cabinet Member or such other councillor or officer as is determined by the Cabinet Member, and shall not be the subject of further debate at this meeting. Questions received after the despatch of the agenda, but before the deadline, will be shown on the Schedule of Addenda circulated at the meeting, together with any written response which is available at that time.

Minutes:

Councillor Howson had given notice of the following question to Councillor Nimmo Smith:

 

“To ask what steps can be taken to stop cars and other vehicles parking on the cycle track along the south side of the Marston Ferry Road in such a manner that makes the use of the cycle path dangerous for those using it for cycling?”

 

Councillor Nimmo Smith replied:

 

Officers have investigated this problem and a traffic regulation order would be required to prohibit this use of the cycle track, which would likely also need to be supported by the installation of bollards. Unfortunately however there is currently no budget available for this work, but we will keep this matter under review should the funding situation change.

 

Councillor Godden had given notice of the following question to Councillor Nimmo Smith:

 

“An accident waiting to happen has happened. Earlier this week a cyclist was badly injured when she was knocked off her bike in collision with a car on the B4044 at Farmoor in my division. As you know, this council, as highways authority, agreed with TVPA that the B4044 was too dangerous for cycling when a request was made for a fund-raising cycling event earlier this year. Yet the road is a busy commuter route within good cycling distance of the City centre. A strong campaign for a cycle path along the existing verge has been going for five years. Will you now agree to include construction of a segregated path alongside the B4044 as a priority project in future road planning?”

 

Councillor Nimmo Smith replied:

 

“At this stage, the scheme needs further development to consider feasibility and funding potential.   The council does not have a fully-funded future programme for such schemes and is required to submit bids which currently meet the central government agenda.

 

Our officers are, however, working with Bike Safe to develop the proposal so that it can better meet funding criteria that supports future growth and address the recognised local community concerns about current conditions for cyclists.”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Godden enquired how the road did not meet central government criteria given that it was a busy commuter route, linking two major roads, with schools at either end. Councillor Nimmo Smith replied that unfortunately although it met the criteria for a cycle path the funding had to come from development and there was not sufficient development in the area to provide the necessary funding.

 

 

 

 

Councillor Bartholomew had given notice of the following question to Councillor Nimmo Smith/Councillor Hudspeth:

 

“The Leader has given assurances that at this stage investigation into a Congestion Charge for Oxford will be given equal weight to a Workplace Parking Levy, yet the report is titled 'Workplace Parking Levy' and a Congestion Charge is only referenced fleetingly at paragraph 5. To avoid confusion, could the Leader and/or Cabinet Member please confirm that an updated Press Release and statement to Councillors clarifying the position will be released after the Cabinet meeting on 22nd November.”

 

Councillor Nimmo Smith replied:

 

“Paragraph 5 is more than clear that congestion charging will be investigated and considered as part of the process. We need to understand the cost of implementation of such a scheme.

 

I am sure that Cabinet will issue a full press statement after a decision has been taken.”

Supporting documents: