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 Constance:
“Has the county council any views on the idea of creating ‘Home
Zone’ streets as defined by the Department for Transport in their design guidelines?”
“The Oxfordshire Street Design Guide, on which work is ongoing, will
seek to provide guidance on the design of developments from master planning
stage to detailed design. We envisage the guide will promote various types of
design which are appropriate for different street types. Therefore, we expect
to include guidance on the use of shared surfaces and space which may be more
appropriate for streets from which properties are directly accessed and are
lightly trafficked. Shared surfaces and space,
encourage motorists to give way to other users of the street and encourage the
use of the street for play and social interaction, which is what Home Zones
seek to achieve. The aim of the design guide is to help create successful
places where people want to live, work and play and to encourage walking,
cycling and use of public transport. We hope to undertake stakeholder
consultation over the summer months and conclude the project in autumn 2019.
“
Supplementary:
Councillor Howson highlighted a proposed development in his local area of a
hotel without parking provision and noted that schemes such as Home Zones would
enable areas to remain as communities. It was an additional tool in addition to
Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs). Councillor Constance thanked Councillor Howson
for the question and agreed that there were occasions when CPZs would be
appropriate and other times when Home Zones could be used.
Councillor
Pressel had given notice of the following question to Councillor Hudspeth:
“At our budget meeting, the
Leader quite rightly said that ‘we must target our resources to provide vital
services to those vulnerable adults and children who require them most’. In the
light of this, please can you tell us exactly what criteria will be used for
deciding how the new £1 million fund for youth services will be allocated? Can
we assume that the data from the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment will be used
to inform our decisions?”
Councillor Hudspeth replied:
“I was delighted to propose and vote for a budget
that was caring and compassionate as it:
Increased the funding on Adult Social Care by £8.8
million
Increased the funding on Children’s Social Care by
£9.0 million
Increased the funding on Education by £3.0 million
Provided £1 million for Youth provision across the
county.
These measures will help the most vulnerable adults
and children across Oxfordshire.
By contrast I noted that Cllr Pressel voted:
AGAINST increasing the funding on Adult Social Care
by £8.8 million
AGAINST increasing the funding on Children’s Social
Care by £9.0 million
AGAINST increasing the funding on Education by £3.0
million
AGAINST providing £1 million for Youth provision
across the county
The criteria for allocating the £1 million for
youth provision will ensure that all areas across the county will be able to
benefit”
Supplementary: Responding to a comment that
the question was unanswered and asking again what criteria would be used and
whether the JSNA would be used Councillor Hudspeth, referred to his original
answer.
Councillor Phillips had given
notice of the following question to Councillor Constance:
“The Growth Deal is funding a feasibility design project for a
pedestrian crossing at the bottom of Collinwood Road in Risinghurst
to be completed by the end of March 2019.
Will this work be completed on time and will it be made available to the
local member? What is your assessment of the likelihood of funding becoming
available to deliver this crossing?”
Councillor Constance replied:
“The feasibility report and design for a
pedestrian crossing at Collinwood Road is on schedule to report by the end of
March 2019. The outputs from this work will be made available to the
local member. Whilst feedback on these outputs would be welcome we do
wish to advise that there is currently no plan to undertake wider consultation
at the current time. At the current time there is no committed funding to
undertake further design work and delivery of this scheme. Through
undertaking the feasibility design work however, the council has advanced
opportunities to bid for or negotiate funding opportunities for a scheme in the
future”
Supplementary:
Councillor Phillips welcomed the feasibility study but sought
clarification whether following the report there would be a costed delivery
plan available, ready to bid should funding become available. Councillor
Constance replied that this was sometimes done but that she was not sure in
this case as there was not the expectation that funding would be available.
However, the scheme was one where the elements were common to many projects and
she would not expect that it would take long to produce a costed plan should it
be required. She declined a request to visit the site explaining that it was
not possible to visit every site.
Supporting documents: