Return to Items for DecisionDelegated Decisions by Cabinet Member for Transport – 27 November 2008Statement of Decision
Oxford High Street Improvements Phase 3 (Turl Street to Longwall Street) Proposed Amendment of Existing Traffic Regulation Orders
Present:
Documentation considered:
A copy is attached to the signed copy of this decision.
Summary of representations in person
Councillor Alan Armitage (West Central Oxford) supported the proposals.
Pam Spurling (owner of Northlight at 36 High Street) referred to the importance of retaining a loading facility outside her shop and referred to instances where enforcement officers had advised that loading/unloading could only be carried out before 10 am and after 4.00 pm. This was wholly inadequate and needed clarification. The pressures facing retail outlets were difficult enough at present and local businesses needed support at this difficult and uncertain time.
Graham Smith referred to the huge concern regarding this scheme which, although presented as minor changes through the promotion of a traffic regulation order were in fact very substantial. he considered the proposals ill conceived, inefficient and a poor use of space with little regard to the needs of cyclists, pedestrians, tourists and local businesses. Cycling provision was inappropriate and increased speeds would lead to more accidents.
Graham Jones also referred to the need to empathise and support local businesses. However, these proposals seemed to be for the benefit of bus movement to the detriment of businesses in the High Street. There would be a reduction in the amount of parking and an increase in the lengths of the bus stopping area would result in loss of visibility of shop frontages from parked buses.
Mr Rossington advised that because of reductions in funding the scheme had been modified over the past 2 years and was now a maintenance scheme. He did not consider the scheme promoted huge change and County officers were mindful of the needs of the business community as well as pedestrians and cyclists. There had been extensive consultation and he stressed that although this was not a road safety scheme there would be some benefits and as a maintenance scheme it would not close off future options. He confirmed that loading and unloading was permissible between 9.30 am and 4 pm.
Cabinet Member’s Comments
Councillor Hudspeth stressed that as a maintenance issue this scheme needed to proceed and traffic regulation orders needed to be in place. He understood the concerns of the local business community but was satisfied that loading and unloading facilities would remain and the impact on business would be kept to a minimum.
Decision
Having regard to the arguments and options set out in the documentation before me, the representations made to me and the further considerations set out above, I confirm my decisions on this matter as follows:
to:
(a) approve the making of the Amendment Orders listed below as advertised but with the minor changes set out in the officer’s response section of Annex 3 to this report CMDT6:
(i) Oxfordshire County Council (Oxford Central Area) (Controlled Parking Zone) (Consolidation) (Variation [No.10]) Order 200*
(ii) The Oxfordshire County Council (Oxford Central Area) (Designation and Regulation of Street Parking Places) (Variation [No.4]) Order 200*
(iii) The Oxfordshire County Council (Disabled Persons Parking Places – Oxford) (Amendment [No.6]) Order 200*
(b) authorise the works necessary to implement the proposals as part of the carriageway maintenance scheme scheduled to commence in June 2009.
Signed ...................................................................... Cabinet Member for Transport
Date ………………………………….
|
||||||||||