Issue - meetings

At their meeting on 4 February 2016, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment (Councillor Hudspeth substituting) made on 14 February 2016 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet for it to consider in the light of the following material concern:  thatthe officersdealing withthe matterhad notbeen madeaware ofthe factthat a 1500+signaturepetitionhad beenpresented toCouncilopposing theproposal;

The following documents are attached (CA10):

(a)      a report setting out the names of the Councillors who have required the call in and the reasons given for the Call in.

(b)      the report considered by the Leader of the Council together with an extract of the minutes of the delegated decision session.

(c)      additional information provided to the Performance Scrutiny Committee in response to the call in

(d)      a note of the material concern of the Performance Scrutiny Committee (e)report by the Deputy Director for Environment & Economy to Cabinet.

Approved

On 4 February 2016, the Performance Scrutiny Committee considered the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment (Councillor Hudspeth substituting) which had been made on 14 February 2016 following proper notice of a call in. The Committee had agreed to refer the decision back to Cabinet to consider in the light of a material concern that officersdealing withthe matterhad notbeen madeaware ofthe factthat a 1500+signaturepetitionhad beenpresented toCouncilopposing theproposal.

Councillor Brighouse presented the comments from the Scrutiny Committee.

Mark Beddow felt that the current layout worked well with no clear justification to change things. There was insufficient room in Station Road for the new arrangement to work efficiently and pedestrian safety would be compromised particularly in the vicinity of The Cornerstone. It would also detract from the recently awarded Didcot Garden Town status and discriminated against elderly shoppers who would be required to walk greater distances from shops such as Sainsbury.  He felt the Cabinet should at least defer a decision.

David Bird confirmed that the 1500 signature petition had been considered when the planning application had been approved and he referred to a letter of acknowledgement from the Deputy Director for Environment (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning) to that effect. There was need for retail expansion and the traffic regulation order had been through a great deal of scrutiny with no procedural or technical reasons for it not to proceed.

Responding to Councillor Rose he confirmed that the petition had been considered by both South Oxfordshire District and Oxfordshire County Councils.

Councillor Hards did not consider that the petition had been taken fully into account or considered when Councillor Hudspeth had taken his decision on 14 January nor by the South Oxfordshire District Council Planning Committee when it granted permission. Speakers at that meeting had been given insufficient time to state their case and he considered that the scheme was being promoted purely to meet the requirements of the  bus companies and it should not go ahead.

Councillor Rose confirmed that the petition had formed part of the consideration of Cabinet at this meeting.

Councillor Greene felt that consultants and developers had been allowed to influence council officers. Endorsing the comments regarding the lack of democratic opportunity afforded to people to make representations to the district planning committee he felt the application and scheme had been pushed through. A better option would have been to pursue provision of the Didcot Northern Perimeter Road.

Addressing the specific terms of the call-in Mr Kemp confirmed that the petition had been identified by the district council as part of its deliberations and that had been minuted accordingly. The petition had also been considered by county officers and although not specifically mentioned in the report considered by the Leader of the Council on 14 January it would not have influenced the officer recommendation to him.  The A4130 Northern Perimeter Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20

Written notice has been given in accordance with the Council’s Scrutiny procedure Rules requiring the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment on 14 January 2016 to be called in for review by this Committee.

The following documents are attached or to be circulated separately:

(a) A report (PSC5(a)) setting out the names of the Councillors who have required the call in and the reasons given for the Call in.

(b) The report considered by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Hudspeth (substituting for the Cabinet Member for Environment) (CMDE5) together with an extract of the minutes of the delegated decision session. (PSC5(b) to be circulated separately).

(c) Additional information provided in response to the call in (PSC5(c) to be circulated separately).

Written notice has been given in accordance with the Council’s Scrutiny procedure Rules requiring the decision of the Cabinet Member for Environment on 14 January 2016 to be called in for review by this Committee.

The Committee had the following documents before them:

(a) A report (PSC5(a)) setting out the names of the Councillors who have required the call in and the reasons given for the Call in.

(b) The report considered by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Hudspeth (substituting for the Cabinet Member for Environment) (CMDE5) together with an extract of the minutes of the delegated decision session. (PSC5(b) to be circulated separately).

(c) Additional information provided in response to the call in (PSC5(c))

Mr Mark Beddows spoke in support of the call in commenting on ground 2 that the proposals were made in March 2015 and not 2013. He also commented that in taking the decision there had been a failure to take into account the impact of the loss of a purpose built bus station and the reduction in pedestrian safety which he illustrated by reference to photographs supplied to members. Responding to questions he stated that Cornerstone was a council hub and the proposals would detract from the attractiveness of their area. Councillor Hudspeth, on a point of clarification stated that in his former role as cabinet member for Transport he had been involved in informal meetings in the early stages of development. The Chairman noted that this was privileged information that had not previously been in the public domain.

Ms Jenny Wilson spoke in support of the Call in, and indicated that she had been the originator of the petition referred to at ground 2. She was still awaiting a response to her objections. She explained why the proposals were not acceptable including that they contained only flag and pole bus stops, the survey had not been published and the detrimental impact on the town centre. It reduced permeability of Didcot, there was no consideration of linkages or  the wider development. Safety of pedestrians would be reduced and she challenged reference to a 2 way bus route as factually incorrect. Responding to questions she stated that bus frequency was 7-9 an hour but would increase and could be every 30 seconds.

Mr Roy Burton spoke in support of the call in, putting forward an alternative solution and asking that any decision be deferred to allow it to be considered.

Councillor Hards, speaking as the originator of the call in and as a local councillor spoke in support of the concerns set out in the call in request. He stated that this was the last chance to ensure that the developers and the South Oxfordshire district Council thought through all the issues. He referred to Ground 2 and pointed out that no mention had been made of any alternative route for buses during consultation on earlier works. On ground 4 he referred to the new information provided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/094

Contact: Owen Jenkins, Highways, Transport & Waste Service Manager Tel: (01865) 323304

Report by Deputy Director for Environment & Economy (Commercial) (CMDE5).

The report presents comments and objections received in the course of a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce and amend various traffic restrictions in Station Road and The Broadway, Didcot, as part of the Orchard Centre (phase 2) development. 

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approveimplementation of the proposals as advertised.

Agreed

The Leader of the Council considered (CMDE5) comments and objections received in the course of a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce and amend various traffic restrictions in Station Road and The Broadway, Didcot as part of the Orchard Centre (Phase 2) development.

Tim Foxhall (Glanvilles) explained that his company had provided support to both District Council and county highway officers and that the orders currently before the Leader of the Council were fundamental to the success of the scheme. Having reviewed the findings of Vectos the other consultants involved he agreed that objections lodged could be met.

David Bird (Vectos) advised that his company had worked closely with both County and District Councils and he was satisfied that all issues had been fully considered and addressed. Thames Travel and Oxford Bus Company were now content with the road width proposed for Station Road and that there would be sufficient emergency procedures should there be any failures of the rising bollards.  As all servicing would take place off-street there would be no interruption to bus flow. He confirmed one resident parking place would be lost but advised that Hammersons had agreed a provision of £10,000 towards the cost of a controlled parking zone. The scheme had been fully assessed with full safety audits carried out and there were no technical reasons why the scheme should not be approved.

Councillor Patrick Greene opposed the recommendation. He referred to a petition of over 1,500 signatures against the Station Road bus route proposals which had been presented to the County Council in April 2015 but not mentioned in the report currently before the Leader of the Council.  Comparisons between this scheme and Queen Street in Oxford were misleading as the situation in Didcot was very different.  He felt that opponents to this scheme had been denied a fair opportunity to present their views particularly at meetings at South Oxfordshire District Council and he asked that those concerns be conveyed to the District Council. He urged the Leader not to approve the scheme or at the very least defer to enable all necessary information to be considered including the petition previously presented to Council.

Mr Kemp confirmed that he had not been aware of the petition referred to by Councillor Greene.

Councillor Nick Hards also opposed the proposals and referred to a pre-planning public exhibition for the Orchard Centre Phase 2 proposals held in November 2013 which had been the first time that a large number of the public had first been alerted to the proposed arrangements for buses including closure of the bus link along High Street. He also referred to congestion at the Jubilee Way roundabout and asked if consideration had been given to the recent award of Garden Town status and how that might affect what was now being proposed. The proposals also needed to be considered in the light of a statement from the Leader of South Oxfordshire District Council who had referred to the need  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47