Return to Agenda

EXECUTIVE – 6 July 2004

ADDENDA

Item

4. Petitions and Public Address

The Deputy Leader of the Council has agreed the following requests to address the meeting:-

Request from

Agenda Item

Councillor Roy Mold )

Councillor Terry Joslin )

Councillor Power )

 

7 - Local Transport Plan

Councillor Roy Mold

8 - Witney Cogges Link Road

Councillor Terry Joslin

10 - Cross Thames Travel

Councillor Neville F. Harris

12 - Education Project Appraisals - Greenmere Primary School, Didcot

6. Development of Countywide Special School Provision including Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead Schools

A response by Woodeaton Parish Meeting to the Statutory Consultation is attached.

Oxford Archaeology's Progress Report on the Woodeaton Manor Conservation Plan is also attached (download as .doc file).

English Heritage's South East Region Inspector of Historic Buildings has confirmed that the approach which the report is advocating "has the wholehearted support of English Heritage" and has expressed the hope that it will be accepted and implemented by the Council.


7. Local Transport Plan

On 12 May 2004 the Environment Scrutiny Committee asked a panel of three members to consider the Local Transport Plan Annual Progress Report and to advise the Executive accordingly. On 24 June 2004 Councillors Shouler, Bearder and Power met to consider the report. Following discussion they agreed to advise the Executive that the Panel:

    1. supported the recommendation that no submission should be made to the Government for the GTE Scheme at the present time, and asked that the report on the Scheme and alternative options comes to the 15 September meeting of the Environment Scrutiny Committee, prior to the consideration of the Executive;

    2. expressed concern that the PSA target of 13% in relation to the number of bus journeys was unrealistic and unlikely to be met;

    3. noted the fact that the target for maintenance of unclassified roads was unlikely to be met but recognised that funding was not available in 2004/05 to fully address the issue;

    4. expressed concern that the grant funding allocated for the A41 Bicester Bypass was at risk if a solution to the deterioration of the embankment could not be implemented in the current financial year;

    5. supported preparation of a major scheme bid for submission to the Government for the Marcham Bypass as part of the APR submission this year.

    6. noted that although there was a planned increase to the number of employers with travel plans to 30 by 2005, the panel felt that these were and would continue to be unsuccessful where employers lost interest soon after having been granted planning permission.

      Return to TOP