Agenda, decisions and minutes

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 Member’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.

Councillor John Tanner

“One of the disadvantages of taking buses out of Queen Street has been increased congestion at certain times of day in St Aldates in my division. I am aware that a Zero Emission Zone could be introduced in the near future which could limit vehicle journeys in St Aldates. However other measures are likely to be needed as well.   Will the Cabinet member agree with me that when buses area again removed from Queen Street, albeit experimentally, that changes are also made to improve conditions to St Aldates? These could include:

1)      Greater restrictions  on loading & unloading and stricter enforcement;

2)      Joining up bus routes, so that, for example, buses from Abingdon might travel through Oxford to perhaps Rose Hill and back, rather than turning around in the middle of the city;   

3)      A pedestrian crossing be installed across St Aldates;

4)      Pavements be further widened in St Aldates

5)      A bus gate be installed at the bottom of St Aldates to prevent other traffic entering the city centre during the daytime”.

Cabinet Member for Environment

“The paper on Queen Street, to be considered at Cabinet Member Decisions, confirms that an experimental closure would be conditional on identifying a deliverable package of improvements which reduce congestion on the road and footways in St Aldate’s, and other routes where buses are displaced. The report puts forward proposals including loading restrictions and removal of traffic signals at junctions, and subject to further investigation, these and other measures may be required to address concerns raised about conditions in St Aldates, and High Street, during the recent consultation. “ 

Supplementary question from Councillor Tanner

“Could the cabinet Member for Environment confirm that this would be dealt with as expeditiously as possible in order to ease congestion.”

Response from the Cabinet Member for Environment

“I have noted your comments and although there is no specific timetable for this I will endeavour to provide some dates for this work to go ahead.”

Councillor James Mills

“Back in February the Cabinet Member for Environment approved the recommendation that improvements be made to the zebra crossing at Oxford Hill, Witney. Please can he give an update on how these improvements are progressing?”

Cabinet Member for Environment

“Unfortunately there have been problems with the consultant and developer who were progressing these works.  We received this week anew submission for the Section 278 works covering the raised crossing, these are now in the process of being reviewed and it is anticipated that these works will take place in the new year.”

Councillor James Mills

“In Witney there are some areas where road markings which indicate limited waiting or loading bays etc. are worn away to such an extent that they cannot be enforced. As this has such obvious safety implications, please could the Cabinet for the Environment indicate when these markings might be properly reinstated?”

Cabinet Member for Environment

“As you will be aware we have a very limited budget for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91/15

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial (CMDE4).

A development of 192 houses on the former Timbmet site on Cumnor Hill has provided funds for a new Puffin crossing to aid pedestrian movements, for both new residents and also the local community. Cumnor Parish Council has been active in seeking implementation of the new crossing and its location and in July 2014 undertook surveys to determine the desire line used by members of the public and school children and the location of the crossing has been based on this survey

At his October meeting the Cabinet Member for Environment approved implementation of the proposal as advertised and described in the report which has been recirculated at CMDE4.

However, following representations from the local County Councillor regarding the exact interpretation of that decision he has agreed to look again at the proposal with a view to confirming its specific aims.

In October 2016 the Cabinet Member for Environment had approved implementation of a proposal to install a puffin crossing on Cumnor Hill and funded by a development on the former Timbmet site.  The location of the crossing had been promoted by the parish council following a survey to determine the desire line.  However, following representations from the local county councillor regarding the exact interpretation of his decision he had agreed to look again at the proposal with a view to confirming its specific aims.

Councillor Godden stressed that she was not attempting to reopen the debate on the proposal but a number of residents from Kings Lane had expressed a view that it should be higher up Cumnor Hill nearer to Chawley Lane and the printed terms of the October decision had not been precise..

The Cabinet Member for Environment apologised for any confusion and confirmed that his decision taken in October 2016 regarding approval for implementation of the crossing had referred to its siting on Cumnor Hill adjacent to Hurst Lane.

Signed……………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated…………………………….

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/035

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

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

The report summarises the formal consultation undertaken on the proposed amendments to traffic regulation orders, bus stop clearways and provision of new zebra crossings in association with Queen Street, Oxford. The consultation took place between 15 September and 14 October 2016. 

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED:

(a)             not to approve the proposals as advertised;

(b)             instruct officers to report to a future Cabinet Member Decisions meeting a proposal for an experimental closure of Queen Street to buses and taxis which addresses the concerns about conditions in St Aldates and High Street raised during the recent consultation and which does not rely on the bus turning facility at Worcester Street; and

(c)             to note the City Council’s and COLTA’s latest correspondence in relation to the decision made at Cabinet Member Decisions on 21 July 2016 regarding changes to TROs for Castle Street, Norfolk Street and Speedwell Street as part of the Westgate centre development and confirm that this does not alter the decision made.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE5) a report which summarised a formal consultation on proposed amendments to traffic regulation orders, Bus stop clearways and provision of new zebra crossings in association with Queen Street, Oxford and the redevelopment of the Westgate Centre.

Sarah Lazenby highlighted difficulties for the elderly and vulnerable and stressed that traffic and planning should take account of this and that perhaps the County Council should appoint a specific and dedicated champion for this sort of work to evaluate proposals.  Moving bus stops further away and beyond the recommended minimum distance was against agreed policy and the proposals were not inclusive for all sections.

Karen Bell expressed concern that this was a sustrans route and it now seemed that cyclists would be prevented from travelling through Queen street between 10 am and 6 pm with no alternative safe east west route through Oxford.  Shared systems for pedestrians and cyclists worked elsewhere and she could see no reason why that wouldn’t be the case in Oxford.  Queen street was wide enough and a joined up transport policy was required.

Simon Hunt spoke as chair of Cyclox and against the  terms of paragraph 30 in the officers report that no further consideration be given tyo changes in cycle access until the question of bus access had been fully resolved..  Originally the proposal had suggested access for cycles for 24 hours but this recommendation if agreed went against County Council policy to encourage pedestrian and cycle activity on what had been identified as a cycle super route; it ignored the majority view from the consultation and would lead to 55 extra buses on St Aldates which made that area more dangerous for cyclists and other road users.  He urged that the original proposal be approved on the basis of an 18 month experimental period.

Sajjad Khan considered that the 107 licensed cabs should be given access through the route and particularly at peak times 8 – 10 am and 4 – 8 pm 7 days a week initially as an experiment.  Secondly Queen street was necessary for cabs to operate effectively in the Queen street and Cornmarket areas.  COLTA were happy to work with the County Councilto progress these issues.

Responding to a question from the Cabinet Member Mr Khan confirmed that the rank at Carfax was available in the evenings and 24 hours on Sundays.

Martin Sutton advised that removal of buses from Queen Street would quite simply be unmanageable and impact heavily on St Aldates, High Street and Speedwell Street. The new development would indeed attract more pedestrians but as many of those would arrive by bus access to Queen Street needed to be retained. Nothing had changed since 2009 when Bonn Square had been closed. That hadn’t worked then and emphasising that bus operators were practical people he was confident safety concerns could be dealt with and urged that buses be allowed to continue to use Queen Street if only for a trial period.

Phil Southall  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94/15

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/095

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

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial (CMDE6).

Sheep Street is a key shopping street in Bicester which is currently one way, with the permitted direction of travel being from north west to south east. Motor vehicles are only allowed in the street to load/unload before 9am and after 4pm daily. In addition a small number of permit holders are allowed at all times (to access off-street parking etc). Ridden pedal cycles are prohibited at all times.

Following local requests to improve cycle facilities in Bicester, a proposal was put forward to permit pedal cyclists to cycle in either direction on Sheep Street outside the period 9am to 4pm.  The report (CMDE6) considers responses received in the course of a statutory consultation on an amendment to the access restrictions to allow that.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to:-

(a)             note the consultation responses;

(b)             not approve the proposed amendment to the access restrictions along Sheep Street as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE6) responses received to a statutory consultation to amend access restrictions to allow pedal cyclists to cycle in either direction on Sheep street outside the period 9 am to 4 pm.

Councillor Lawrie Stratford supported the recommendation not to allow this change. He recognised the benefits of cycling but not at the expense of pedestrian safety and Sheep Street was very much a pedestrian street.  He advised that he was not the local member but was speaking on behalf of other Bicester county councillors.

Having regard to the information set out in the report before him and the representations made to him the Cabinet Member for Environment recognised that the proposals were not acceptable and agreed:

(a)             to note the consultation responses;

(b)             not to approve the proposed amendment to the access restrictions along Sheep Street as advertised.

Signed……………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated…………………………………….

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/079

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

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial (CMDE7).

The report presents responses received in the course of a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce additional and amended waiting restrictions in the Horton View area in Banbury following local requests for action to address parking concerns

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the amended proposals described in this report and shown in Annexes 4 and 5

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE7) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce additional and amended waiting restrictions in the Horton View area of Banbury.

Debra Dumbleton spoke on behalf of businesses in the area the majority of whom felt the restrictions were too excessive and would have a detrimental affect on many of their customers the majority of who were either elderly or mothers with young children.  The local business community were concerned that use of local facilities would fall and ultimately close if customers were required to park further away.

Councillor Kieron Mallon endorsed the views expressed regarding viability of the shops particularly the post office. Accepting the need to maintain safety at junctions he felt there was scope to reduce the restriction without affecting safety. He also asked that a minor restriction be considered to extend the restriction to cover the residence of an elderly resident to assist in deliveries to her property. He thanked officers and the Cabinet Member for their consideration in these matters.

Mr Tole confirmed that the amendments as suggested could be incorporated in the order And officers would undertake some local negotiation to achieve the best outcome.

Having regard to the information set out in the report before him and the representations made to him at the meeting the Cabinet Member for Environment agreed:

to approve implementation of the amended proposals in Horton View and Ruskin Road, Banbury as described in the report and shown in Annexes 4 and 5 to that report subject to authorising the Director for Environment & Economy to agree minor amendments following consultation with local representatives including the local member to meet local issues raised by businesses and residents.

Signed ……………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated…………………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/097

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

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial (CMDE8).

The report (CMDE8) presents an objection and other comments received in the course of the statutory consultation on the proposals to extend the 30mph speed limit, and to provide a toucan crossing and convert an existing footway to shared use footway/cycletrack on the A4260 Banbury Road at Deddington.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the proposals as advertised and described in the report.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE8) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposals to extend the 30 mph speed limit and to provide a toucan crossing and convert an existing footway to shared use/cycle track on the A4260 Banbury Road in Deddington.

David Rogers speaking as Chairman of Deddington Parish Council advised that construction of the development of 85 houses had already started with a temporary site entrance and a contractor’s entrance formed off the A4260. The hedging had also been cut back and some trees felled for vision splay lines.  An application to up that number to 99, which had been lost on appeal was being considered by Cherwell District Council this afternoon. He added that the highways design for this site as detailed in drawing JNY8344-01D had included the construction of a footpath link from the proposed pedestrian entrance to the A4260 / B4031 crossroads on the west side of the Banbury Road. That was to be formed by widening an existing footpath to two metres and extending it further north to the Toucan crossing as described by the application documents However, there had been indications that the developer had failed to deliver on similar footpaths in neighbouring villages. The Parish Council felt that the scheme should be delivered in full and were therefore requesting that Oxfordshire County Council should require all aspects of the design to be delivered including this path on the West side of the A4260.  They understood that this was a view shared by the County Council officers.

Mr Tole advised that although not part of the consultation the footway was a requirement of the outline planning consent and formed part of the S278 agreement between the County Council and the developer. There had been some confusion over this but county officers were endeavouring to ensure that the footpath was delivered prior to the first occupation and although today’s decision concerned other issues officers felt the footway should be provided.

County Councillor Arash Fatemian fully supported the recommendation although he queried its timing as the final application had not yet been determined. Supporting the representations made by the parish council he stressed the need to get this right and asked the Cabinet Member when endorsing the recommendation to make it clear that the footway should be delivered as part of the S278 agreement.

Having regard to the information set out in the report before him and the representations made to him at the meeting the Cabinet Member for Environment approved his decision as follows:

to approve implementation of proposals as advertised and described in the report CMDE8 with the expectation that the footway proposed for the west side of the Banbury Road would be delivered as part of the S278 agreement.

Signed………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated………………………………...

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/082

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

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy – Commercial (CMDE9).

Concerns over the obstruction of traffic and road safety as a result of uncontrolled on-street waiting on William Lucy Way have been raised by residents and the local members over a number of years.  The report presents responses received in the course of the statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce a Controlled Parking Zone.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the proposals as advertised and described in the report.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE9) responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce a controlled parking zone on William Lucy Way, Oxford in order to address concerns over obstruction and safety raised by residents and the local member.

Councillor John Howson drew attention to increased use of Oxford station which has in turn increased pressure on William Lucy Way from commuter parking and overnight parking.  The current proposals had been worked out over time and he thanked the officers for their work on the scheme which he fully supported.

Mr Tole confirmed that these proposals had been some time in the making but officers felt that the scheme as currently proposed was the best solution and that a god balance had been achieved.

Responding to a question from the Cabinet Member he confirmed that there were 63 dwellings some of which had off road parking and others not. Consultation had been carried over 2 years and responses had been received from every dwelling and he felt that the benefits would be widespread.

The Cabinet Member for Environment advised that he had visited the area and was satisfied that the scheme represented the best opportunity for all residents. Therefore having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to hime at the meeting he confirmed his decision as follows:

to approve implementation of the proposals for William Lucy Way as advertised and described in the report CMDE9.

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/105

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

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy - Commercial (CMDE10).

The report presents an objection and comments received in the course of a statutory consultation on the proposal to install a puffin crossing on the London Road at Wheatley northwest of its junction with The Glebe.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the proposal as advertised and described in the report.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE10) responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to install a puffin crossing on the London Road, Wheatley northwest of its junction with The Glebe.

Andrew Johnson speaking for the St Mary’s Action Group considered that the proposed revised siting was an improvement it still did not in their view represent the best siting.  That in their view was between The Glebe and the western access of the new development and although not ideal in every respect it was the best practical solution as there were perceived safety issues with the proposed siting which was not considered to be on the optimum desire line.  He confirme that South Oxfordshire District Council and Wheatley parish Council supported their proposed revised siting.

Councillor Anne Purse endorsed the comments made by Mr Johnson and also referred to concerns regarding speeding.

Mr Tole referred to government guidance that crossings should not be sited within 20m of a junction and the constraints here meant that there was not enough room between The Glebe and the new development junction to comply with that guidance although officers had tried to get it as close as possible.  Rules governing zebra crossing were not as stringent but were not as effective where speeds were above a certain threshold, In view of the representations he suggested that the current proposal be deferred and that officers work with the developer and consultants to see if a humped zebra crossing with regard to issues of addressing speeding traffic could be delivered within the parameters of the development.  If that was not possible then the current proposal would need to be brought back to the Cabinet Member for decision.

The Cabinet Member for Environment had visited the site and he agreed that the issue was to ascertain the best siting and what could be delivered.  Therefore having regard to the information set out in the report before him and the representations made to him at the meeting he confirmed his decision as follows:

to defer consideration of the current proposal to install a puffin crossing on London Road, Wheatley to allow officers to review whether there were other options to provide a crossing in this general area and to report back the results of any re-consultation as required.

Signed…………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated……………………………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/113

Contact: James Blockley, Countryside Access Team Leader Tel: (01865) 810205

Report by Interim Deputy Director for Environment & Economy - Commercial (CMDE11).

he Priority Caseload Approach (PCA) is a revised system for allocating staff and financial resources to issues arising on the network of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) across Oxfordshire. It is designed to manage public and stakeholder expectations and give objective guidance to officers and others involved in the fulfilment of OCC’s statutory responsibility for PRoW in a transparent and fair way. It is intended to encompass the majority of the OCC Countryside Access Team’s (CAT) work through this approach, and is not restricted to the prioritisation of reported issues.

The PCA was outlined in the Oxfordshire Rights of Way Management Plan 2015-25 (adopted by Cabinet in November 2014), but has undergone a process of consultation and redesign in the intervening two years. As such, further Cabinet approval (via Delegated Decisions) is required in order to for it to be fully embedded as a new management framework and to demonstrate to public and stakeholders that it benefits from organisational support.

The associated report explains the Approach in some depth, paying particular attention to planned benefits, practical application and process detail.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to support the objectives and principles of the Priority Caseload Approach and approve its implementation.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE11) a revised system (Priority Caseload Approach) for allocating staff and financial resources to issues arising on the network of public rights of way across Oxfordshire in order to manage effectively public and stakeholder expectations.

Mr Blockley outlined the importance of the rights of way network as a recreational aspect as well as a health and well being resource. The Countryside Access team wa small which made it all the more important to manage the network effectively and to make full and efficient use of resources.

It was important to prioritise work and also to publicise this approach to volunteers who carried out invaluable support work.

The Cabinet Member for Environment recorded his thanks to the efforts of volunteers who supported work carried out on the rights of way network and having regard to the information set out in the report before him and the representations made to him at the meeting confirmed his decision as follows:

to support the objectives and principles of the Priority Caseload Approach and approve its implementation.

Signed………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Dated……………………………………….