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 Howson

“Will the Cabinet member review the refusal of the request from parents for a review of the cycle path on the Woodstock Road south of Polstead Road to St Margaret's Road that would improve the safety of children cycling to school and make the cycle path better for all users?”

Response by the Cabinet Member for Environment

“Council officers will review the feasibility of this measure including an exploration of suitable opportunities for funding its delivery. Officers will report back to the member on the outcomes of this process in due course. “

Supplementary Question

‘Parts of LTP4 could make current changes being programmed around the City Centre a waste of time. Should these monies not instead go to support cycling to benefit children going to school such as along Woodstock Road?’

Response by the Cabinet Member for the Environment (including Highways)

‘LTP4 sets out the Council’s long term plans for transport and is not necessarily fully funded at present. At the moment priority is being given to moving traffic around the City centre in relation to the Westgate development. There will however be a separate look at a range of routes situated outside the core of the City centre and Woodstock Road is on that list. OCC will then be in a position to bid for this at the right time.’

Councillor Roz Smith

“When will local councillors and residents receive the detailed time table and detailed design changes for the Access to Headington schemes?

Response by the Cabinet Member for Environment

“The scheme is deliberately being delivered in phases to manage the impact on this highly congested and sensitive part of the network. Delivery in phases also allows for management of the scheme’s budget and scope which has been deliberately set out to allow the council to deliver the most improvement for the available budget.

In order to present the schemes properly to those locally affected by the works and to promote a focus on the immediate work, we decided to hold exhibitions and update our website for the phases as they are delivered. Given the need to be reactive to demands on the network, the works embargo due to Westgate opening and the overall flexibility of the scope of the scheme, the works programme will be presented in the same way, outlining the individual packages as they are coming to construction.

We will upload the final designs for all phases to the council’s website so they are available to the public for their perusal, but will continue to promote as we have done in order to preserve the clarity of the information available for ‘live’ phases.

We are currently delivering Phase 2 which is The Slade, with Phase 3 to be the double mini-roundabouts near Marsh Lane and the junction with the JR hospital on Headley Way. Cllr Smith along with other councillors in the impacted wards, both city and county, have and will continue to be invited to monthly stakeholder meetings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1/17

Item 4: Proposed Car Club Bays – Oxford

County Councillor John Howson

Item 5: Proposed Waiting Restrictions – Various Streets, Bicester

County Councillor Les Sibley

County Councillor Lawrie Stratford

Comments from County Councillor Michael Waine who was unable to attend

Item 6. Proposed Waiting Restrictions and Traffic Calming – Bankside, Banbury

Dr Peter Orford (Local Resident)

Forward Plan Ref: 2017/033

Contact: David Tole, Traffic Safety & Area Steward Manager Tel: (01865) 815942

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE4).

As part of the joint Oxfordshire County Council/Oxford City Council ‘Go Ultra Low Oxford’ project (a government funded project to trial electric car charging technologies on street) a number of existing Car Club bays are being converted to be used for electric vehicles. To compensate for this it has been agreed as part of the project to provide alternative Car Club bays for the displaced petrol/diesel vehicles.

The report presents objections and other comments received in the course of a statutory consultation on the proposals to introduce additional car club bays in Oxford.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the proposals as advertised and amended as set out in the report CMDE4.

As part of the joint Oxfordshire County Council/Oxford City Council ‘Go Ultra Low Oxford’ project (a government funded project to trial electric car charging technologies on street,) a number of existing Car Club bays were being converted to be used for electric vehicles. To compensate for this it had been agreed as part of the project to provide alternative Car Club bays for the displaced petrol/diesel vehicles.

Prior to consideration of the item Cllr Constance was addressed by local member Cllr John Howson. He expressed his full support for the provision of electric vehicles parking bay on Bainton Road in its proposed site. However, he expressed some concern about the siting of the same at the western end of Leckford Road, believing the road to be very busy with retail premises nearby. He added that the other end of Leckford Road, to the south of Kingston Road, would be a better site as it was wider at the end. David Tole, in response to this commented that the proposed site had proximity to a lighting column, to be used as a source of power for the electric vehicles. He added also that, whilst he recognised that some objections had been received, it was important to place them in localities where they were visible and attractive to users.

The Cabinet Member for Environment (including Transport) now considered the report (CMDE4) which contained the responses received in the course of a statutory consultation on the introduction of the scheme.

She recognised the concerns of Cllr Howson but also the argument that the bays needed to be in a place that was attractive to potential users. Therefore, having regard to the arguments and options set out in the report before her, she resolved to:

approve the implementation of the proposals as advertised and amended as set out in the report CMDE4, subject to the Officers reviewing the following locations at:

-       Nelson Street (near the Synagogue),

-       St. John Street

-       Observatory Street

-       Leckford Road

Signed…………………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment (including Transport)

Date of signing………………………………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/094

Contact: David Tole, Safety & Area Steward Manager Tel: (01865) 815942

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE5).

The report presents objections and other comments received in the course of a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce new and amend existing waiting restrictions in various streets in Bicester in order to address concerns raised by local members and at the Bicester Traffic Advisory Committee over the obstruction of traffic and road safety as a result of on-street waiting at a number of locations within the town.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approvethe implementation of the proposals as advertised and described in the report CMDE5.

The report (CMDE5) presented objections and other comments received in the course of a statutory consultation on proposals to introduce new and amend existing waiting restrictions in various streets in Bicester in order to address concerns raised by local members and at the Bicester Traffic Advisory Committee over the obstruction of traffic and road safety as a result of on-street waiting at a number of locations within the town.

Prior to her consideration of this item she was addressed by local members County Cllr Les Sibley and County Cllr Lawrie Stratford, respectively.

Cllr Sibley declared himself to be broadly in support of and welcomed the proposals but with a few reservations. He requested that Officers consider providing a ‘Keep Clear’ advisory marking in the vicinity of Stoneberg Crescent, as bus drivers found it very difficult to egress onto Bucknell Road. Moreover, he welcomed the monitoring of the proposals to assess their impact and any need to make modifications or take additional measures, as stated in paragraph 10 of the report, asking what the timescale would be for this.

Cllr Stratford gave some background to the proposals highlighting the fact that local members had worked had worked together with officers and had spent a great deal of time with residents prior to and during the consultation. A healthy response had been received to the consultation and, as a result, the proposals had been reviewed, adjusted and re-consulted upon. Nevertheless it was his view that they should be monitored closely and that there should be a review in 6 months, although he was minded for this to be stretched to 12 months. He recognised in particular the concerns expressed by residents of Bucknell Road and Field Street, appreciating their concerns and the need to monitor. He concluded by congratulating the Officers on their work.

The Cabinet Member also noted the following comments sent by local member, County Cllr Michael Waine who was unable to attend:

‘I am very happy to support all the proposals, particularly those in my division, but would ask that support be readily given to residents in Bernwood Road by giving practical advice where dropped curbs are necessary to access potential parking on owners property, especially those whose access would be through a ‘parking lay-by’

The Cabinet Member heard that there had also been a late submission from a resident (reported orally by David Tole) of Brashfield Road regarding proposals that had yet to be reported to CMD9E. She noted that any objections arising from this would come to a future meeting and residents would be given the opportunity to speak.

The Cabinet Member now considered the report CMDE5 and the representations made as stated above. Therefore, having regard to the arguments and options set out in the report before her she confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the implementation of the proposals as advertised and described in the report CMDE5, on the understanding that there would be a review of the scheme in the next 6 –  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4/17

Forward Plan Ref: 2016/118

Contact: David Tole, Safety & Area Steward Manager Tel: (01865) 815942

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE6).

The report presents objections and other representations received in the course of a consultation on proposed traffic calming measures (including a raised zebra crossing) and waiting restrictions on Bankside, Banbury.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to:

a)           approve the implementation of the proposed parking restrictions as advertised and amended as set out in the report CMDE6; and

b)           approve the implementation of the proposed traffic calming measures and raised zebra crossing.

The report (CMDE6) presented objections and other representations received in the course of a consultation on proposed traffic calming measures (including a raised zebra crossing) and waiting restrictions on Bankside, Banbury.

The Cabinet Member heard an address from Dr Peter Orford, a local resident, making the following points:

·         The cause of the problem had not been addressed and the proposals punished more people that they deserved;

·         Commuters were parking on Bankside rather than at the railway station;

·         More homes were being built in Banbury which would serve to exacerbate the problem as the amount of traffic would increase;

·         A complete ban on parking was too severe as it would restrict residents from using the park. To remedy this impact he suggested a 3 hour maximum waiting time Monday to Friday; and

·         Introduce an all-day parking permit at Morrison’s Supermarket and passes or subsidies be introduced for workers who currently park on Bankside.

The Cabinet Member noted that Officers would be working with local residents on how to adapt the proposals to meet the requirements of the development of south east Banbury in terms of traffic growth:  as part of these proposals there could be a number of blocks with no restrictions.

The Cabinet Member now considered the report CMDE6 and the representations made as stated above. Therefore, having regard to the arguments and options set out in the report before her she confirmed her decision as follows:

(a)  to approve the implementation of the proposed parking restrictions as advertised and amended as set out in the report CMDE6 subject to the addition of the section between Farm Close and Spinney Drive to the list of sections where no restrictions will be introduced;

(b)  to approve the implementation of the proposed traffic calming measures and raised zebra crossing; and

(c)  all the above to be subject to a review of the effect of the parking restrictions 6 months’ after implementation.

Signed……………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment (including Transport)

Dated…………………………………………….

Forward Plan Ref: 2017/059

Contact: David Tole, Traffic Safety & Area Steward Manager Tel: 01865 815942

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE7).

The report considers objections received as a result of a formal consultation on proposals to introduce new Disabled Persons’ Parking Places (DPPP) at various locations in Berinsfield, Sonning Common, Stoke Row (on South Oxfordshire) and Abingdon and Steventon (in Vale of White Horse).

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed changes, amended as set out in the report CMDE7

The report CMDE7 considered objections received as a result of a formal consultation on proposals to introduce new Disabled Persons’ Parking Places (DPPP) at various locations in Berinsfield, Sonning Common, Stoke Row (on South Oxfordshire) and Abingdon and Steventon (in Vale of White Horse).

The Cabinet Member now considered the report CMDE5 and the representations made as stated in the report. Therefore, having regard to the arguments and options set out in the report before her she confirmed her decision as follows:

To approve the proposed changes, amended as set out in the report CMDE7.

Signed……………………………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment (including Transport

Dated………………………………………………………