Agenda, decisions and minutes

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/042

Contact: Hugh Potter, Team Leader – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE4).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce waiting restrictions comprising double yellow lines - ‘no waiting at any time’ – at Pioneer Way, Hexham Road and Whitelands Way in the Kingsmere development at Bicester.The proposals have been put forward at the request of the developers of Kingsmere residential and commercial development to address concerns over parked vehicles obstructing the spine roads and, in particular, restricting visibility at junctions and bends. The roads are due to be adopted as public highway following the completion of the development.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed double yellow lines (no waiting at any time) restrictions as advertised excepting the two lengths on Whitelands Way as shown in red in Annex 2 to the report, with a further review of waiting provision to be carried out on completion of the development to include an assessment of whether waiting can be permitted on the length of Pioneer Way shown in blue also in Annex 2.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE4) responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce no waiting at any time restrictions at Pioneer Way, Hexham Road and Whiteleands way in the Kingsmere development t at Bicester put forward by the developers of that residential and commercial development to address concerns over parked vehicles obstructing the spine roads and restricting visibility at junctions and bends.

Speaking in support Councillor Sibley also confirmed that there was a great deal of local support for the proposals.  Whitelands Way was becoming more and more difficult to navigate and the current on-street parking situation was becoming dangerous as the development was built out.  As a main route for buses it was difficult for them and emergency vehicles to manoeuvre when the route was obstructed with parked vehicles.  Proper and safe access needed to be provided and with a lot of side roads off the main spine road it was becoming more difficult for residents. It was important to manage this now as the development was only ¾ completed with 1900 houses with possibly more again planned.  He accepted the 2 sections for limited parking could address concerns regarding speeding but safe access was the priority.  He also asked the Cabinet Member to consider calling for a 6-month review after the restriction had been implemented and for confirmation regarding responsibility for monitoring and enforcement.

Officers confirmed that unlimited parking would not be allowed on both sides and would form part of any review if carried out.  With regard to enforcement the police response had indicated that they saw this low priority but had urged that the county, district and town councils continue further discussions with a view to progressing de-criminalisation orders and restrictions that could be enforced by those authorities as part of a special parking area and given higher priority.  It also seemed that the local constable had indicated he could offer some level of enforcement but again that would need to be a low priority.

Mr Levis a resident of Kingsmere supported the no parking proposals on Whitelands and pointing out that the problem lay with the development itself in that not enough parking had been provided and as many houses as possible had been crammed in by the developers. Consequently residents were not parking off-road with parking very much an off-peak problem. He felt every street should be residents parking with two permits for each household. There were dead areas which could be utilised to install parking bays while leaving room to manoeuvre on Whitelands.  He also pointed out that overflow parking was available at the community/sports centre and street lights were not working.

Officers confirmed that as the roads had not been adopted street lighting was a developer responsibility but it was understood that they were due to be fixed the following week.  Regarding to the dead areas referred to by Mr Levis these were general landscaping areas put in at the request of the district council to soften the look of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31/18

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/033

Contact: Hugh Potter, Team Leader – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE5).

The report presents responses received to a consultation on a proposal to provide cycle lanes on both sides of the B4493 Wantage Road put forward at the request of the developers of the Great Western Park development to provide a high standard cycle route between the development and the town centre.

The report sets out how the proposals will help facilitate the safe movement of traffic in support of LTP4 objectives.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed cycle provision on both sides of the B4493 Wantage Roadas advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CME5) responses received to a consultation on a proposal to provide cycle lanes on both sides of the B4493 Wantage Road put forward at the request of the developers of the Great Western Park development to provide a high standard cycle route between the development and the town centre.

Officers confirmed that there had been an earlier consultation on a previous scheme which had not gone ahead. Also regarding concerns expressed during the current consultation process regarding safety for both cyclists and cars where they had to interact at the Georgetown roundabout at the eastern end of the cycle lane they confirmed that that was outside the scope of the current scheme but plans for a stage 2 element as part of the Garden Town initiative were under discussion which would consider that issue.  However, in the meantime options would be looked at to introduce signage at the roundabout to ameliorate those concerns.

Having regard to the information set out in the report before her and the representations and assurances given to her at the meeting the Cabinet member for Environment confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed cycle provision on both sides of the B4493 Wantage Road as advertised.

Signed………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing…………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/025

Contact: Hugh Potter, Team Leader – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE6).

On 12 April 2018 the Leader of the Council (who was substituting for the Cabinet Member for Environment at that meeting) deferred a decision on proposals to provide bus stops, including a bus stop clearway on the south side of the road within a layby, and a pedestrian refuge on the A420 at Buckland, approximately 150 metres north-east of the Buckland Service Station and put forward as part of a proposed development on the south side of the A420 at the Buckland Services site to allow further information to be obtained on the rationale behind the proposal in respect of encouraging customers and staff at the new development to change their travel patterns to the site taking account also of the planning consent issued by the Vale of the White Horse District Council. That information is set out in a revised report together with the original report to the April meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve  proposals to provide bus stops, including a bus stop clearway on the south side of the road within a layby, and a pedestrian refuge on the A420 at Buckland, approximately 150 metres north-east of the Buckland Service Station as advertised.

On 12 April 2018 the Leader of the Council (who had been substituting for the Cabinet Member for Environment at that meeting) deferred a decision on proposals to provide bus stops, including a bus stop clearway on the south side of the road within a layby, and a pedestrian refuge on the A420 at Buckland, approximately 150 metres north-east of the Buckland Service Station put forward as part of a proposed development on the south side of the A420 at the Buckland Services site. That deferral was to allow further information to be obtained on the rationale behind the proposal in respect of encouraging customers and staff at the new development to change their travel patterns to the site taking account also of the planning consent issued by the Vale of the White Horse District Council. The Cabinet Member for Environment now considered a report (CMDE6) setting out that information together with the original report deferred at the April meeting.

Councillor Heathcoat reiterated her concern regarding the interpretation given to the response by the police which she did not consider could be taken as not objecting.  There was a new potential conflict point at the 2 stops in Pusey Wood which were not lit.  She reiterated Buckland Parish Council’s support for provision of a footpath rather than 2 new bus stops.  There was currently limited bus use which could be supported by existing stops of which there were 4 and provision of pedestrian facilities made far more sense and be of greater value to and safer for residents.

Mr Kirkwood explained the background to the comments submitted by Thames Valley Police and agreed that provision of a footpath would be excellent but unfiortunately that had not formed part of the planning process for the development and there was no funding available for its provision.  The only element that the county council was legally required to consult on was the waiting restriction in the layby.  Provision of a footpath would be a massive variation on the existing permission which would need to go back to planning.

The Cabinet Member could see the reasons behind calls for a more suitable scheme and, noting a local preference as stated by the parish council and local member for a footpath on the south side of the A420, recognised the aspirational merits for provision of such a path between the development and Buckland village if funding could be found. Unfortunately, that could not be done as part of this S106 agreement and despite a full and wide discussion which had taken place regrettably she felt she could do nothing other than agree the proposal which had been drawn up in accordance with the District Council’s planning decision but with an alteration to the timing of the clearway restriction to 24 hour. 

Therefore, having regard to the information set out in the report before her and the representations made to her at the meeting she confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve proposals to provide  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33/18

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/044

Contact: Hugh Potter, Team Leader – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Infrastructure Delivery (CMDE7).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit in place of the existing 30mph limit on the village roads south of the B4477 at Kencot put forward by Kencot Parish Meeting in response to concerns over road safety and the wider adverse impact of traffic on residents and visitors to the village.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit in place of the existing 30mph limit on the village roads south of the B4477 at Kencot as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE7) responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit in place of the existing 30mph limit on the village roads south of the B4477 at Kencot put forward by Kencot Parish Meeting in response to concerns over road safety and the wider adverse impact of traffic on residents and visitors to the village.

Noting that the scheme although funded by the Parish Meeting complied fully with Department of Transport guidance on the use of 20 mph speed limits and Highway Authority requirements and having regard to the information set out in the report before her the Cabinet Member confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit in place of the existing 30mph limit on the village roads south of the B4477 at Kencot as advertised.

Signed………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing……………………………..