Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies.  Councillor Duncan Enright attended remotely.

Councillor Calum Miller declared a non-pecuniary interest on Item 11 as he was a coach with Gosford All-Blacks Rugby Club.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21 December 2021 (CA3) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 December 2021 were approved and signed.

The questions received from County Councillors and responses are set out in an Annex to these Minutes.

Currently council meetings are taking place in-person (not virtually) with Covid safety procedures operating in the venues.  However, members of the public who wish to speak at this meeting can attend the meeting ‘virtually’ through an online connection.  While you can ask to attend the meeting in person, you are strongly encouraged to attend ‘virtually’ to minimise the risk of Covid-19 infection.

Please also note that in line with current government guidance all attendees are strongly encouraged to take a lateral flow test in advance of the meeting.

Normally requests to speak at this public meeting are required by 9 am on the day preceding the published date of the meeting. However, during the current situation and to facilitate these new arrangements we are asking that requests to speak are submitted by no later than 9am four working days before the meeting i.e. 9 am on Wednesday 12 January 2022 Requests to speak should be sent to colm.ocaomhanaigh@oxfordshire.gov.uk .  You will be contacted by the officer regarding the arrangements for speaking.

If you ask to attend in person, the officer will also advise you regarding Covid-19 safety at the meeting.  If you are speaking ‘virtually’, you may submit a written statement of your presentation to ensure that if the technology fails, then your views can still be taken into account. A written copy of your statement can be provided no later than 9 am 2 working days before the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

The Chair agreed the following speakers.

Speakers

Item 6: Budget and Business Planning Report

Graham Jones            

Bernadette Evans

Cllr Eddie Reeves

Cllr Michael O’Connor

Cllr David Bartholomew

Cllr Yvonne Constance

Item 7: Kidlington LCWIP

Christiaan Monden

Cllr Ian Middleton

Cllr Andrew Gant

Item 8: A40 HIF2 Smart Corridor

Cllr Dan Levy

Cllr Ian Middleton

Item 9: Traffic Management Act   

City Cllr Alex Hollingsworth

Item 11: Land at Stratfield Brake, Kidlington

Jo Sandelson

John Hill

Cllr Ian Middleton

Cllr Andrew Gant

Cllr Nigel Simpson

Petition:

Caroline Raine presented a presentation on the discontinued No. 16 bus route.  She stated that statistics showed that Littlemore and Donnington were among the most deprived areas, with an older population and a lack of facilities.  The number 16 bus was important to the community for accessing health and community services, leisure facilities and schools.  Many users described the bus service as a ‘lifeline’.  The lack of a bus service will force many to drive causing congestion and increased emissions, contrary to the policies being pursued in the Local Transport and Connectivity Plan.  She asked that the Council provide a subsidy to allow the route to operate.

Councillor Tim Bearder, Cabinet Member for Highway Management, thanked Caroline Raine for the petition which highlighted important points.  He emphasised that the city services were run by independent companies.  Services had been impacted by Covid and they had to reduce costs to stay in business.  The government had cut the funding for the Bus Service Improvement Plan.  However, this administration’s goal was to increase bus usage and provide more reliable services that can be profitable.

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/136

Contact: Kathy Wilcox, Head of Financial Strategy Tel: 07788 302163

Report by Director of Finance (CA6).

Cabinet proposes 2022/23 revenue budget, MTFP and capital programme for recommendation to Council in light of comments from the Performance & Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Committee and consultation feedback. Includes the Review of Charges.

NB Annex C and Section 2.1 to follow

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.            In relation to the draft strategic plan (Section 2);

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to RECOMMEND Council to:

a)    adopt the strategic plan.

2. In relation to the Revenue Budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy (Section 4);

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

b)   approve the Review of Charges for 2022/23 and in relation to the Registration Service, charges also for 2023/24 (Annex A);

c)    approve the final schools funding formula for 2022/23 subject to the decision by the Secretary of State for Education regarding permission to transfer 0.5% (£2.2m) from the Schools block to support High Needs expenditure (Annex B)

d)   Receive and thank the Performance and Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their Budget Scrutiny report and note the response as set out in Annex C (to follow);

e)    approve the Financial Strategy for 2022/23 (Section 4.5);

f)     approve the Earmarked Reserves and General Balances Policy Statement 2022/23 (Section 4.6);

g)   and to note that the Leader of the Council will, following consultation with the Director of Finance and the Cabinet Member for Finance,

make any appropriate changes to the proposed budget following receipt of information relating to the outstanding matters at paragraph 9 of this report

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to RECOMMEND Council to:

h)   approve a Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2022/23 to 2025/26 as set out in Section 4.1 (which incorporates changes to the existing Medium Term Financial Strategy as set out in Section 4.2);

i)     agree the council tax and precept calculations for 2022/23 set out in Section 4.3 and in particular:

                                                       (i)    a precept of £435,816,475;

                                                      (ii)    a council tax for band D equivalent properties of £1,651.61.

                                                    (iii)    approve a revenue budget for 2022/23 as set out in Section 4.4

3. In relation to the Capital and Investment Strategy and Capital Programme (Section 5);

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to recommend Council to:

j)     approve the Capital and Investment Strategy for 2021/22 - 2031/32 (Section 5.1) including;

                                                       (i)    the Minimum Revenue Provision Methodology Statement (Section 5.1 Annex 1);

                                                      (ii)    the Prudential Indicators (Section 5.1 Annex 2)

                                                    (iii)    the updated Pupil Place Plan (Section 5.1 Annex 3) and

k)    approve the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy for 2022/23 (Section 5.2); and

                                                       (i)    continue to delegate the authority to withdraw or advance additional funds to/from external fund managers to the Director of Finance;

                                                      (ii)    approve that any further changes required to the 2022/23 Treasury Management Strategy be delegated to the Director of Finance in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Finance;

                                                    (iii)    approve the Treasury Management Prudential Indicators; and

                                                    (iv)    approve the Specified  ...  view the full agenda text for item 6/22

Cabinet had before it proposals for the Strategic Plan and related revenue budget for 2022/23, medium term financial strategy to 2025/26 capital programme to 2031/32 plus supporting policies, strategies and information.  Before discussing the report, the Chair had agreed to hear a number of speakers.

Councillor Eddie Reeves, Chair of the Performance & Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Committee, reported the views of the scrutiny committee’s discussions over two meetings.  The points were agreed cross-party.

Their meeting on 10 December agreed recommendations which were outlined in the supplementary document attached to the Agenda.  These included:

·         the administration’s priorities should be more clearly defined

·         there should be Key Performance Indicators to ensure ongoing monitoring.

·         the Corporate Plan should provide greater clarity around its environmental ambitions at strategic and measurable levels

It was unfortunate that the Committee’s discussion on the capital programme had only taken place the day before this meeting however he summarised the nine main points agreed by that meeting:

·         Climate Change and decarbonisation needed to be mainstreamed in the Capital Programme;

·         Maximising social value should be part of the procurement policy;

·         More to tackle economic and gender inequalities and possibly a future generations policy

·         Consider allocation of unused borrowing and use of capital resources to improve SEND provision.

·         Assess deliverability of capital projects before committing to them.

Councillor Michael O’Connor, Deputy Chair of the Performance & Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Committee, added that there would be a written report produced on the Committee’s views on the Strategic Plan.

The Chair agreed that Cabinet would consider that report before finalising the proposals for Council on 8 February.

Councillor David Bartholomew, Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance, expressed disappointment that the papers for this item included a report from the Cabinet Member for Finance in the same standard format as officer reports which he described as a political and subjective document that should be clearly identified as such.

Councillor Bartholomew in particular noted the comment that the administration had ‘inherited underfunding’.  He stated that the universal expectation at the time of his administration had been that the pandemic would result in deflation and unemployment whereas the opposite had been the case.

He stated that he had a long record of drawing attention to financial concerns around the Kennington Bridge project. He welcomed the proposed re-assessment of major projects and hoped that the Cabinet would be consistent in its approach between its own projects and those it had inherited.  Councillor Bartholomew also asked where the costs in unpicking the partnership with Cherwell District Council were taken account of in the budget.

Councillor Yvonne Constance stated that she wanted to correct the record in relation to comments in the report from the Cabinet Member for Finance on the previous administration in which she was Cabinet Member for Environment (including Transport) and which she believed implied incompetence.

Councillor Constance described the way in which costs on Kennington Bridge escalated as significant changes were made to the bridge design and the funding arrangements.  An outline business  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/22

Cabinet Member: Highway Management

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/185

Contact: Eric Stevens, Principal Infrastructure Planner Tel: 07436 700673

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA7).

The Kidlington Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan sets out a cycling and walking network plan for the village including links to neighbouring rural settlements and measures to improve the network over a ten-year timescale to 2031. An improved comprehensive network will increase the uptake of active travel modes.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to approve the Kidlington Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan.

Cabinet was asked to approve the Kidlington Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) which set out a cycling and walking network plan for the village including links to neighbouring rural settlements and measures to improve the network over a ten-year timescale to 2031.

Before discussing the item Cabinet heard from a number of speakers:

Christiaan Monden was speaking as a Kidlington resident, a father of three school-aged children, a former school governor and trustee of Cycling Without Age.  He believed that a people-centred approach was needed with infrastructure that gave all, regardless of age and ability, a genuine choice to walk or cycle. He urged Cabinet to approve these plans as a first step.

He emphasised three things: 1) redevelopment of the junctions and roundabout on the Oxford/Banbury road have to be top priority; 2) not to spend money on the canal path; 3) a system more connected and joined-up across the many developments around Kidlington.

The first lockdown showed that the people of Kidlington will cycle if it is a safe and convenient option.  Also, people needed safe and convenient bike storage which should be provided in all developments.

Councillor Ian Middleton, Kidlington South, broadly supported the document though he hoped that it could continue to evolve.  He was not keen on shared-use paths and had concerned about development of the canal towpath.  He would like to see a firm commitment to a cycle path on the Bicester Road by Edward Field School.

Councillor Middleton was also concerned that there was not yet a position adopted on Kidlington roundabout and noted that it would be impacted by the proposed stadium.  He was hoping to meet with officers to discuss improvements in the plan.

Councillor Andrew Gant, the Council’s Cycling Champion, supported the comments of other speakers.  He stated that it was unclear how consultation responses to the Plan had been factored in.  He asked Cabinet to make sure that they were.  He believed that access to schools and connectivity were the key factors in the Plan.

Councillor Gant believed that the Active Travel proposals in the Oxford North development were unsatisfactory and Plans such as this one needed to provide options for them.  He urged Cabinet to adopt the plan and allow further development of it.

Councillor Tim Bearder thanked the speakers and agreed that the Plan would have to evolve, particularly with new developments arising such as the potential stadium.  These plans were very important given the huge growth in housing that was planned across the county.  It was necessary to have these plans in place in order to avail of funds such as S106 monies when they become available.

Councillor Bearder noted speakers’ concerns that consultation feedback had not been sufficiently incorporated and was happy to have discussions with them and officers to ensure that it was.

Cabinet Members provided further comments:

·         supporting the calls to ensure that it be made clear how consultation feedback was incorporated into the plans being adopted.

·         emphasising the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/22

Cabinet Member: Travel & Development Strategy

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/131

Contact: Tom Shuttleworth, Programme Lead (A40), Tel: 07908 059132

Annex A is included in this agenda reports pack.

Annex B is published as a separate pack “Supplementary Documents” due to their number and size.

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA8).

To seek approval of the Statement and Orders Plans and approval to make the Compulsory Purchase and Side Road Orders.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

a)            Confirm that the acquisition of the land identified on the map attached to this report (Annex B) (“the Order Map”) being the map accompanying The Oxfordshire County Council (Highways Infrastructure - A40 HIF2 Smart Corridor (Hill Farm to Dukes Cut)) Compulsory Purchase Order 2022 (“the CPO”) is necessary for highway purposes;

b)           Approve the Joint Statement of Reasons (Annex A) for the CPO and The Oxfordshire County Council (Highways Infrastructure – A40 HIF2 Smart Corridor (Hill Farm to Dukes Cut)) (Side Roads) Order 2022 (“the SRO”), together with approving the CPO, the Order Map, the SRO and the plans accompanying the SRO (“SRO Plans”) all substantially in the form annexed to this report but to delegate to the Corporate Director Environment & Place following consultation with the Monitoring Officer, authority to modify them as necessary;

c)            Authorise the Monitoring Officer to make The Oxfordshire County Council (Highways Infrastructure – A40 HIF2 Smart Corridor (Hill Farm to Dukes Cut)) (Side Roads) Order 2022 (“the SRO”) to enable the stopping-up, diversion, alteration, improvement and creation of new lengths of highway or reclassification of existing highways, and giving authority to the acquisition of necessary land pursuant to the CPO. The SRO also enables the stopping up of private means of access as necessary where the scheme design necessitates and re-provision of private means of access.

d)           Authorise the Monitoring Officer to make The Oxfordshire County Council (Highways Infrastructure - A40 HIF2 Smart Corridor (Hill Farm to Dukes Cut)) Compulsory Purchase Order 2022 pursuant to Sections 239, 240, 246, 250 and 260 of the Highways Act 1980 (as amended) and Schedule 3 to the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 for the purpose of acquiring the land and interests shown on the Order Map and described in the Schedules to the CPO (or such lesser area of land should this in his opinion be appropriate) to facilitate the construction of new highway on such land and that the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to the CPO and to the Order Map;

e)            Authorise the Monitoring Officer to advertise the making of the CPO and the SRO and to submit the CPO and SRO to the Secretary of State for Transport for confirmation, together with authorising the Monitoring Officer to take all other relevant action thereon to promote the confirmation of the CPO and the SRO;

f)             In the event that any Public Inquiry is convened to consider objections to the CPO and/or SRO and/or planning application (by way of a call-in decision), to authorise the Monitoring  ...  view the full agenda text for item 8/22

Cabinet considered a report seeking approval of the Statement and Orders Plans and approval to make the Compulsory Purchase and Side Road Orders.  Before discussing the report, Cabinet heard from a number of speakers.

Councillor Dan Levy, Eynsham, shared the concerns of local residents that this scheme was more about providing for more development around Eynsham and was probably not going to improve bus reliability but may increase traffic by providing a dual carriageway.  This would not help with climate change.  The plans involved a lot of new junctions and roundabouts that would provide difficulties for cyclists and pedestrians and may also encourage rat-running.  Eynsham roundabout in particular was badly designed.

Councillor Levy accepted it was an inherited project and officers had greatly improved it but there was still a long way to go.  Residents of Eynsham and Cassington would bear the brunt of the construction work and see fewest benefits from the scheme.  He asked that the cycle lane be kept open during works with a good surface.

Councillor Ian Middleton, Kidlington South, agreed with the points made by the previous speaker.  He believed that the scheme would do little to ease congestion but just attract more traffic as had been the case with development of the A34.  He hoped that the new Park & Ride at Eynsham would have more provision for cyclists and electric vehicles.

Councillor Middleton asked that dialogue continue on making improvements to the scheme and on ensuring that temporary facilities for Active Travel during construction were better than those provided at the Oxford North development.

Councillor Duncan Enright, Cabinet Member for Travel and Development Strategy, thanked the speakers and agreed that the scheme would be quite different if the current administration had been responsible for the design.  He emphasised though that there were benefits for residents of areas out beyond Eynsham in terms of improved bus service because the stretch from Eynsham to Oxford provided a bus lane and did not increase the space for cars.

The scheme, he added, should be seen in conjunction with other improvements such as increased capacity on the North Cotswold railway line, development of Oxford Railway Station to increase its capacity and possibly re-opening the Witney branch.

Councillor Enright stated that this provided an opportunity to make the proposed Park & Ride a transport interchange improving connectivity for residents of villages in the area.  He took on board the points made regarding roundabouts, rat-running and temporary cycle lanes.

He also noted that this project did not take account of the Salt Cross development but transport aspects of that development would clearly need to take account of this scheme.  The application for planning permission had already been made and this proposal was about the next step and the provision of CPOs if needed.

The Chair put the recommendations and they were agreed.

RESOLVED to:

a)            Confirm that the acquisition of the land identified on the map attached to this report (Annex B) (“the Order Map”) being the map  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8/22

Cabinet Member: Highway Management

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/198

Contact: Keith Stenning, Head of Service – Network Management Tel: 07584 581214

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA9).

The Department for Transport will be inviting applications for a Designation Order to enable a Highway Authority to undertake civil enforcement of site specific Traffic Regulation Orders within a geographical area already covered by Civil Parking Enforcement. For Oxfordshire, this can include the whole County as Civil Parking Enforcement is now Oxfordshire wide.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)             Approve submission of an application to the Department for Transport to apply for a Designation Order for Oxfordshire to enforce moving traffic offences.

(b)             Approve the Site Selection Critiera at Annex 1 and Resource Priorisation Framework at Annex 2 to manage decisions for potential enforcment delivery.

The Department for Transport will be inviting applications for a Designation Order to enable a Highway Authority to undertake civil enforcement of site specific Traffic Regulation Orders within a geographical area already covered by Civil Parking Enforcement. For Oxfordshire, this can include the whole County as Civil Parking Enforcement is now Oxfordshire wide.  Cabinet was asked to consider approving an application.  Before discussing the proposal Cabinet heard from one speaker.

Councillor Alex Hollingsworth, Oxford City Council, Carfax & Jericho Ward, supported the recommendations and asked Cabinet to make a minor adjustment to the wording of Annex 1, the Site Selection Criteria.  This was related to the huge growth in the numbers of moped and motorcycle delivery riders.  Many of these riders were law abiding and considerate but many were not. In particular, the use of footways and cycle routes by heavy motorised vehicles travelling at speed was a serious risk to cyclists and pedestrians.

Councillor Hollingsworth asked that the Cabinet specifically include in the list of Site Selection Criteria listed in Annex 1, 2(vi) a reference to protecting existing pedestrian and cycle priority facilities.

Councillor Tim Bearder, Cabinet Member for Highway Management, agreed that there was a problem as the speaker outlined but did not believe that it was necessary to amend the Annex as described in order to tackle it.

It had been hugely frustrating for the Council to not have the powers now being applied for.  This was in the government’s gift.  Further powers to install cameras to enforce the new plan of 20mph zones would also be welcome.  The plan was to consult with the police and focus on a small number of locations initially.  Further consultation will take place with city and district councils to maximise the impact.

The Chair put the recommendations and they were agreed.

RESOLVED to:

(a)             Approve submission of an application to the Department for Transport to apply for a Designation Order for Oxfordshire to enforce moving traffic offences.

(b)             Approve the Site Selection Critiera at Annex 1 and Resource Priorisation Framework at Annex 2 to manage decisions for potential enforcment delivery.  

In the event that any Member or Officer wishes to discuss the information set out in the Annex to Agenda Item 11, the Cabinet will be invited to resolve to exclude the public for the consideration of the Annex by passing a resolution in relation in the following terms:

"that the public be excluded during the consideration of the Annex since it is likely that if they were present during that discussion there would be a disclosure of "exempt" information as described in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 and specified below the item in the Agenda".

NOTE: The report does not contain exempt information and is available to the public.

THE ANNEX TO THE ITEM NAMED HAS NOT BEEN MADE PUBLIC AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ BY MEMBERS AND OFFICERS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE THEM.

It was agreed that there was no requirement to exclude the public as there was no request to discuss the information in the exempt Annex.

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/241

Contact: Steve Jorden, Corporate Director Commercial Development, Assets and Investment Tel: 07770 867896

Report by Corporate Director - Commercial Development, Assets and Investment (CA11).

The information in this case is exempt in that it falls within the following prescribed categories:

3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, in that a negotiation is ongoing and would prejudice the position of the authority in the process of that negotiation and the Council’s standing generally in relation to such matters in future, to the detriment of the Council’s ability properly to discharge its fiduciary and other duties as a public authority.

The annex containing exempt information under the above paragraph is attached.

Oxford United Football Club (OUFC) have approached OCC and requested that OCC transfer c.18 hectares (44.48 acres) of land for the development of a new 18,000 capacity football stadium with ancillary leisure and commercial facilities to include, hotel, retail, conference, and training/community grounds.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to enter into negotiations as requested by Oxford United Football Club (OUFC) and with Oxfordshire County Council’s current tenants to enable the use of Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) owned land for the development of a new football stadium, subject to planning permission.

If Cabinet decides to proceed it is RECOMMENDED that

a)           Officers ensure that any proposal by OUFC is consistent with the Oxfordshire Fair Deal Alliance’s priorities, by achieving the following objectives for the use of the OCC’s land:

                   i.          maintain a green barrier between Oxford and Kidlington and improve access to nature and green spaces;

                  ii.          enhance facilities for local sports groups and on-going financial support;

                iii.          significantly improve the infrastructure connectivity in this location, improving public transport to reduce the need for car travel in so far as possible, and to improve sustainable transport through increased walking, cycling and rail use;

                iv.          develop local employment opportunities in Oxfordshire;

                  v.          increase education and innovation through the provision of a sports centre of excellence and facilities linked to elite sport, community sport, health and wellbeing;

                vi.          support OCC’s net zero carbon emissions pledge through high sustainable development;

b)           Officers enter negotiations and agree a deal that achieves community benefit, meet OCC’s aspirations and complies with The European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020 and is in accordance with S.123 of the Local Government Act 1972.

c)           Cabinet agrees delegated authority to the Corporate Director, Oxfordshire County Council – Commercial Development, Assets and Investment, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Finance & Property, to agree financial terms and to instruct OCC Legal Services accordingly.

Cabinet had before it a proposal to enter into negotiations as requested by Oxford United Football Club (OUFC) and with Oxfordshire County Council’s current tenants to enable the use of Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) owned land for the development of a new football stadium, subject to planning permission.  Before considering the proposal, Cabinet heard from a number of speakers.

Councillor Andrew Gant, Wolvercote and Summertown, noted that there was a great deal of public interest in this proposal.  However, there had been no time for meaningful engagement and he asked Cabinet to delay a decision for perhaps two months to allow for full public engagement.  He noted that the proposals included a commitment that the project would be consistent with the Fair Deal Alliance’s priorities.

Councillor Gant asked that the Council work with the football club to ensure provision and promotion of Active Travel options to access the site.  He also suggested that they discuss key issues with Cherwell District Council as the planning authority and report back on their position.

There were aspects of the proposal that were welcome.  The site was more accessible than the current stadium and there were assurances that the facilities for local sports clubs would be safeguarded.

John Hill questioned whether Oxford United Football Club Limited should be considered suitable to undertake a multimillion development at Stratfield Brake.  If the building of a new United stadium by this Council was thought to be of sufficient priority over other pressing needs, then he believed that the only realistic option in the time scale suggested was to bring in a national commercial developer and for the Council to build the stadium in partnership.

The Council would then own the stadium and it was likely that it would have to meet some of the running costs itself.  Whether this was a good use of scare resources was a matter for debate.  He believed that the Council should not be too strongly focused on the end date of United’s lease as it was commonplace for football clubs to share grounds and this option was available if United decided to leave the Kassam stadium.

Councillor Ian Middleton, Kidlington South, spoke as a member of the County Council, District Council and two parish councils affected by the proposals.  There were varying views locally on the proposal and there had not been enough time to judge the overall public mood.

He was concerned that the proposed development was on Green Belt, which had already been eroded.  The land in question had been acquired by the Council to prevent sprawl.  There was already a lot of development in the Kidlington area.  He supported calls to provide more time for engagement and emphasised that the leasing structure at the site was complex involving multiple partners.

Councillor Nigel Simpson, Kirtlington and Kidlington North, stated that he was a season ticket holder with the club.  He could see the benefits from the sporting side but was also aware of residents’ concerns regarding traffic, parking and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11/22

Cabinet Member: Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/138

Contact: Colm Ó Caomhánaigh, Committee Officer Tel: 07393 001096

Report by Director of Law & Governance (CA12).

To report on a quarterly basis any executive decisions taken under the specific powers and functions delegated under the terms of Part 7.1 (Scheme of Delegation to Officers) of the Council’s Constitution – Paragraph 6.3(c)(i).  It is not for Scrutiny call-in.

The report was noted.

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Alison Bartlett, Democratic Support Officer Tel: 07741 607515

The Cabinet Procedure Rules provide that the business of each meeting at the Cabinet is to include “updating of the Forward Plan and proposals for business to be conducted at the following meeting”.   Items from the Forward Plan for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet appear in the Schedule at CA13.  This includes any updated information relating to the business for those meetings that has already been identified for inclusion in the next Forward Plan update.

The Schedule is for noting, but Cabinet Members may also wish to take this opportunity to identify any further changes they would wish to be incorporated in the next Forward Plan update.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.

The Cabinet considered a list of items (CA13) for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet together with changes and additions set out in the schedule of addenda.

The Chair noted that the Cabinet’s response to Councillor Middleton’s motion passed by Council on 14 December 2021 will be taken at the Cabinet meeting on 15 March 2022.

RESOLVED:            to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.