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 Roz Smith

“I note the forward plan shows a decision to be made about the new controlled parking zone for the Headington Quarry Conservation area is to be made at the October meeting.  The informal consultation showed the majority of residents to be in agreement.  As the lock-down eases more non-residential, commuter parking is taking place. Please could you inform me how and when the formal consultation will take place?”

Suggested zone be retitled HQN.

Cabinet Member for Environment

“Councillor consultation will take place from August 24 – September 7 followed by the Statutory and Public consultation, which takes place week commencing September 14 until October 12. This will be followed by a review of the comments and objections (October 17- November 23), which will also be discussed during Cabinet Members Decision due to take place week commencing November 9.”

Councillor Roz Smith

“The Access to Headington project included an off-road cycle way on the part of the Old Road which is narrow and steep, particularly hazardous for cyclists.  Recognising that works are retro fitting as best possible, the completed off road cycle ways are being used but the stretch of Old Road is still be completed thereby putting many off using this route, particularly Cheney School pupils.  Could the cabinet member please give indication as to when works might start on this section?”

Cabinet Member for Environment

“There is a detailed design and Oxford University are currently in discussions with the Council regarding the dedication of land to facilitate the construction of this proposal, which is progressing positively.

We are currently at an advanced stage of bidding for alternative funding from DfT and hope to be able to confirm the outcome of the bid in the next month. If the bid is successful we would expect work to commence this Autumn.

I note your additional enquiry regarding alternative funding being part of the second Tranche of funding but I’m not able to confirm that.”

Forward Plan Ref: 2019/185

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE4).

The report presents an ‘overview’ of responses received in the course of the statutory consultation following the implementation in November 2019 of an experimental Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) prohibiting access by motor vehicles to and from Walton Street at its junction with Beaumont Street and Worcester Street in Oxford.  A determination on whether to make the experimental order permanent would typically follow promptly following the end of the formal consultation phase. However, in light of the ongoing COVID-19 situation and following a significant number of responses received during the formal consultation period, county council officers are recommending deferral of a decision on Walton Street until a later date recognising that a final decision on whether to make the trial closure permanent is still required before May 2021. 

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to defer a decision on the continuation of the above experimental order pending further analysis and assessment of its impact.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE4) presenting an ‘overview’ of responses received in the course of a statutory consultation following implementation in November 2019 of an experimental Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) prohibiting access by motor vehicles to and from Walton Street at its junction with Beaumont Street and Worcester Street in Oxford.  A determination on whether to make the experimental order permanent would normally follow promptly following the end of formal consultation but in light of the ongoing COVID-19 situation and following a significant number of responses received during formal consultation the Cabinet Member was being recommended to defer a decision on Walton Street until a later date while recognising that a final decision on whether to make the trial closure permanent would still be required before May 2021. 

Patrick Davey (St Bernards Road Residents) advised that the Walton Street closure had led to an extra 500-750k cars per year being ‘rat runned’ into our side-street of St Bernards Rd. Additional cars, which bumper to bumper would stretch 4-5000 miles. That is on top of what we already had, on top of what was already our fair share and taking Walton Streets fair share. Unfair indeed while at the same time traffic now using south Walton Street was zero which was quite unfair and Walton Street, the major arterial highway for entering and leaving Jericho was now a sea of unimaginable tranquillity at the expense of devastation in St Bernards Road.

You are well aware of these issues and the problems and we have appreciated your expressed sympathy and promises of mitigation. However, no mitigation has occurred. 

In light of this, I could have shouted for identical treatment as Walton Street - total closure right now for St Bernards Road. However, I have sought to have principles for traffic flow: 

1) equity with each area to take their fair share of traffic 

2) traffic to exit by the shortest route to the major roads around Jericho/Walton Manor (Beaumont St, St Giles, Woodstock Rd) 

3) no internal rat running between different areas. 

4) reduced overall traffic.

5) enhanced environment

I have met with many others throughout Walton Manor and Jericho to create plans that had community wide support and were just, equitable and sought to enhance our environment. With compromise between different streets and groups we believe a solution will be found, a just one. 

However, in the interim, we request mitigation for St Bernards Road and I am urging you today:

1.   To re-open Walton St, given the imminent bus gate.

2.   To commit the county council to implementing our mitigation in St Bernards Road within 4 or 5 weeks. 

3.   To further develop and implement the Jericho Low Traffic Neighbourhood Plans. 

I urge you to do what is right and fair and very much hope that you will be able to help us all create a wonderful environment for the future in which we all wish to live and of which we are all  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/020

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE5).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce additional cycle parking places in Oxford city centre at New Road, Queen Street, Ship Street, Speedwell Street, Turl Street and Wellington Square.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve proposed additional cycle parking places in central Oxford on New Road, Speedwell Street, Wellington Square and Ship Street.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE5) a report presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce additional cycle parking places in Oxford city centre at New Road, Queen Street, Ship Street, Speedwell Street, Turl Street and Wellington Square.

Officers confirmed that the proposals had been included in the Active Travel Tranche 1 funding.

Noting that there had been 46 responses to the consultation with only one objection received to each of the sites the Cabinet Member for Environment, having regard to the information set out in the report before her confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve proposed additional cycle parking places in central Oxford on New Road, Speedwell Street, Wellington Square and Ship Street.

Signed………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing……………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/086

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE6).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce six pairs of speed cushions on Godstow Road at Wolvercote, Oxford put forward in conjunction with Oxford City Council who have undertaken to fund the project subject to approval being given to proceed with the scheme.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed introduction of speed cushions on Godstow Road as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE6) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce six pairs of speed cushions on Godstow Road at Wolvercote, Oxford put forward in conjunction with Oxford City Council who had undertaken to fund the project subject to approval being given to proceed with the scheme.

The local member County Councillor Paul Buckley had submitted the following comments in support of the introduction of these traffic calming measures. However, having noted that the Oxford Bus Company had not responded to the consultation and since their number 6 bus serving Lower Wolvercote was an essential service for many residents of Lower Wolvercote, for accessing other parts of Oxford, he had sought assurances from Oxford Bus Company that the speed cushions would not impede their buses. The Managing Director of OBC had assured him that their lack of response had been because they had not foreseen a major problem. However, he had pointed out that buses would need to straddle speed cushions to avoid a jolt to passengers and this would not be possible if there was on-street parking on both sides of the road. Parking on one side only could be accommodated, but only by the bus moving to the other side of the road, to straddle the other cushion of the pair. He had requested that these factors were taken account when the cushions were installed and any feasible measures employed to mitigate the problem.  He corrected paragraph 14 of the report as he understood the Oxford City Council had agreed to fully finance the proposed measures from CIL funds generated by the Mill Site development.

Officers confirmed the detail of the response from the Oxford Bus Company.

Having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to her at the meeting the Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed introduction of speed cushions on Godstow Road as advertised.

Signed ………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing………………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/090

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE7).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive, Bicester where parking - in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems for residents.  The proposals were considered at the Cabinet Member for Environment delegated decisions meeting on 21 May as part of a larger group of proposed waiting restrictions in Bicester which had been put forward following discussions and site meetings with officers and the local members. While the other proposals were approved at that meeting, a decision on the proposals for Browning Drive and Kingsley Road was deferred to allow further investigation and investigation.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed waiting restrictions on Browning Drive and Kingsley Road as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE7) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive, Bicester where parking - in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems for residents.  The proposals had been considered at the Cabinet Member for Environment delegated decisions meeting on 21 May as part of a larger group of proposed waiting restrictions in Bicester which had been put forward following discussions and site meetings with officers and the local members and while the other proposals had been approved at that meeting, a decision on the proposals for Browning Drive and Kingsley Road had been deferred to allow further investigation.

County Councillor Les Sibley considered the need for on street parking restrictions in Browning Drive, Bunyan Roadand Kingsley Road in Bicester as urgent as it was patently evident that inconsiderate and dangerous parking of vehicles at the T junctions created a hazardous and dangerous situation for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. The report stated that an objection had been received that the parking restrictions would adversely affect residential parking in Kingsley Road but he pointed out that there were no residential parking facilities in this road.   The CO-OP HGV vehicle which delivered twice a day to the local store was an ongoing traffic and parking issue that needed to be resolved as the vehicle when it parked by the bus stop/post box in Kingsley Road to load and off load blocked the entrance to either the car park at the front of the shops or the car park to the rear. This ongoing situation was a potential safety hazard for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Drivers of local buses had also complained about inconsiderate and dangerous parking of vehicles at both T junctions as it caused visibility and other safety issues. Thames Valley Police had not objected indicating that without traffic restrictions in place they were unlikely to prosecute an offending motorist. Bicester Town Council supported the traffic regulations requesting that yellow lines are enforced. Local Bicester Town and County Councillors also supported the proposal.

He understood the concerns from some residents that introduction of double yellow lines might lead to issues of displaced parking and should the recommendation be agreed then a review should be undertaken following completion of the signage and lines to address any issues that might arise. 

Rachael Shaer a resident of Browning Drive expressed concern over a fundamental error in regard to the Browning Drive Waiting Restriction Proposal as it stated that ‘The proposal was to introduce and amend waiting restrictions on Browning Drive where parking – in particular by commuters – is resulting in road safety and access problems by residents.’  That was not true and was very misleading as there was no commuter parking! Commuter parking insinuated cars were parked all day whereas the parking that happened in the proposed area on Browning Drive was all short term.  She added that she had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/057

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE8).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation introduce a 7.5 tonne environmental weight limit in the Easington area of Banbury and raised junction table with zebra crossing at the Springfield Avenue junction with Horton View and Ruskin Road put forward as a result of discussions between the local County Councillor and residents. Firstly to improve road safety and the feeling of security in the vicinity of the two schools on Springfield Avenue (there are a large number of children that travel through this area and a large number of older, vulnerable residents) and secondly to prevent the existing problems of HGVs rat-running through this area, including those from two existing construction sites at opposite sides of the proposed restriction, which are only likely to be exacerbated when a third site opens to the south.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed 7.5 tonne environmental weight limit in the Easington area of Banbury and proposed raised junction table with zebra crossing at the Springfield Avenue junction with Horton View and Ruskin Road as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE8) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce a 7.5 tonne environmental weight limit in the Easington area of Banbury and raised junction table with zebra crossing at the Springfield Avenue junction with Horton View and Ruskin Road.  The proposals had been put forward as a result of discussions between the local County Councillor and residents to improve road safety and the feeling of security in the vicinity of the two schools on Springfield Avenue and secondly to prevent the existing problems of HGVs rat-running through this area.

Peter Monk had been due to make a statement but in his absence that was read out by an officer:

“I write to point out that the proposals will not produce the benefits sought. There is no dispute that the traffic calming and regulation measures already applied to this area of Banbury have not produced the improvement expected. It is therefore surprising that 'more of the same' is now being proposed. There is no evidence, yet, that penetration by HGV vehicles serving nearby, new housing developments are using Sycamore Drive, Timms Road and Springfield Avenue as an alternative to the Oxford Road - although it is a possible future scenario.

The extension of the existing weight restriction will not, I suggest, make the route less attractive to drivers seeking to save time and avoid congestion - the only things that will do that would be better enforcement of the present measures (unlikely with current police resources) or self-enforcing measures. The latter would be effective but probably bring forth cries of protest from residents - especially those who vociferously advocate 'pouring good money after bad'.

Will a second pedestrian crossing close to the existing one at Horton View / Ruskin Ave be any more of a deterrent than the existing one just north of that junction? He suggested not.

The situation at that point is exacerbated by the 'snack and sweet' shop on the south-west corner (which is very popular with students) and the existence of a 'table hump' at this point which encourages young people to believe that it is an authorised crossing - which it isn't. How there have not been more injuries at that point is amazing.

Better student discipline at this location could be achieved by: -

a)  the schools providing supervision at assembly and dispersal times,

b)  remove the 'table' at this point (or convert it to a 'hump) and extend the guardrails on the east side of Springfield Ave. as far as possible towards the south-bound bus stop and,

c)  convert the existing zebra crossing to a Toucan.

The latter would provide motorists with a visual warning of the crossing position and impose some control over the current careless use by students, both on foot and cycle and also imbue elderly residents of Stanbridge House, and elsewhere, with confidence to use this crossing point instead of crossing randomly, as now.

Whilst the use of the zebra crossing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2019/189

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE9).

The report presents objections received to a statutory consultation on  proposals to  remove, amend and introduce disabled persons parking places (DPPP’s) at various locations in the Cherwell and West Oxfordshire districts put forward following requests from residents, including – where a new place has been requested - an assessment of  eligibility, applying the national guidelines on the provision part of such parking places.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed provision of Disabled Persons Parking Places (DPPP) at: Bridge Street Banbury; Bretch Hill, Banbury; Cheviot Way, Banbury; Evenlode Drive,  Bicester; New Street, Deddington - noting this DPPP is to be an informal rather than statutory DPPP; The Paddocks, Deddington; Wadards Meadow, Witney; Leys Close, Wroxton.

But defer approval of the proposals at the following locations pending further investigations: Angus Place, Banbury; Ribston Close, Banbury; Blake Road, Bicester; Walterbush Road, Chipping Norton; High Street, Hook Norton.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE9) presenting objections received to a statutory consultation on  proposals to  remove, amend and introduce disabled persons parking places (DPPP’s) at various locations in the Cherwell and West Oxfordshire districts put forward following requests from residents, including – where a new place had been requested - an assessment of  eligibility, applying the national guidelines on the provision part of such parking places.

Officers explained the difference between an advisory space and a statutory space and advised that one of the respondents in respect of Hook Norton – High Street (number 26 in Annex 13 to the report) had requested that his submission which had been classified as a concern be recorded as an objection. 

The Cabinet Member for Environment noted the amendment and complimented officers on their work in examining these proposals so carefully and having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to her at the meeting confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed provision of Disabled Persons Parking Places (DPPP) at: Bridge Street Banbury; Bretch Hill, Banbury; Cheviot Way, Banbury; Evenlode Drive,  Bicester; New Street, Deddington - noting this DPPP is to be an informal rather than statutory DPPP; The Paddocks, Deddington; Wadards Meadow, Witney; Leys Close, Wroxton;

but defer approval of the proposals at the following locations pending further investigations: Angus Place, Banbury; Ribston Close, Banbury; Blake Road, Bicester; Walterbush Road, Chipping Norton; High Street, Hook Norton.

Signed………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing…………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/011

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE10).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to provide the above bus gate. Currently a concrete barrier is provided at the point where the bus gate is proposed which prevents the passage of any motor vehicle. The introduction of a bus gate at the point Larch Drive meets Diamond Drive was included in the planning consent for the Great Western park residential development to remove the potential for ‘rat-running’ traffic to use these roads as a route between the Wantage road and Park Road. 

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed bus gate at the point Larch Drive meets Diamond Drive.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE10) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to provide a bus gate at the point where Larch Drive met Diamond Drive, Didcot to replace a concrete barrier which currently prevented the passage of any motor vehicle.

Officers read out a submission from a CJ MacDonald-Bradley.setting out requirements for advanced signage to this location. He had also urged that the recommendation not to allow motorcycles to pass the gate be reconsidered, for the reason specified clearly by the one Respondent. It would not prevent motorcycles but merely 'hinder' them, possibly leading to frustration and to them looking to ride on pavements or other, to avoid camera enforcement. If the Council did insist on preventing the very few motorcycles that passed here then it must be prepared to ensure that the restriction was enforced.

Officers confirmed that the developers Taylor Wimpey had now agreed to provide for advanced signing and the intention was to prohibit all motor vehicles except buses.

Noting that the main objection had been met by the developer providing  advanced signing and having regard to the information set out in the report before her and representations made at the meeting the Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed her decision as follows: 

to approve the proposed bus gate at the point Larch Drive meets Diamond Drive.

Signed …………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing………………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/088

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE11).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to designate a 20-metre length of existing footway as a shared use footpath/cycle track to facilitate access to and from an approved new off-road cycle route between the Milton road and Milton Park.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed widening of a footway to provide a shared use footpath/cycle track on Milton Road at the access point to an off-road cycled track between the Milton road and Milton Park.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE11) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to designate a 20-metre length of existing footway as a shared use footpath/cycle track to facilitate access to and from an approved new off-road cycle route between the Milton road and Milton Park.

Officers confirmed funding would be provided via the local growth fund as part of the Science Vale network Project.

Noting that although there had been one objection local support for this scheme had been high in comparison the Cabinet Member for Environment therefore, having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to her at the meeting confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed widening of a footway to provide a shared use footpath/cycle track on Milton Road at the access point to an off-road cycled track between the Milton road and Milton Park.

Signed …………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing…………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/025

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE12).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to provide no waiting at any time and no waiting between 9am and 5pm Mondays to Fridays at Boulter Drive, Cullerne Close and Loyd Close, Abingdon put forward by the local member in response to concerns over safety and the obstruction of traffic arising from parking on the bend on Boulter Drive, around the Boulter Drive/Cullerne Close & Loyd Close junctions and within Loyd Close itself.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve proposed waiting restrictions at Boulter Drive, Cullerne Close and Loyd Close Abingdon as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE12) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation on a proposal to provide no waiting at any time and no waiting between 9am and 5pm Mondays to Fridays at Boulter Drive, Cullerne Close and Loyd Close, Abingdon put forward by the local member in response to concerns over safety and the obstruction of traffic arising from parking on the bend on Boulter Drive, around the Boulter Drive/Cullerne Close & Loyd Close junctions and within Loyd Close itself.

Officers read out submissions from:

A resident of Loyd Close who had objected strongly to any parking restrictions on Loyd Close. When he had purchased his property in Loyd Close there were no parking restrictions as with most residential areas. However, when approval was given to building an extension to the surgery and the pharmacy in a residential area it had been deemed that there would be no detrimental effect on traffic in the area, which on reflection had been naïve.  It now seemed very unfair that the first houses on both sides of Loyd Close would be discriminated against in relation to on road parking all because of that decision, which had been objected to by the residents of the area for these very reasons. The parking issues on Boulter drive were caused solely by the inconsiderate parking of the staff from the medical centre who could easily park at the community centre car park and should be encouraged to do so. Since the COVID-19 pandemic it had become obvious that cars parked on Boulter drive belonged to staff at the medical centre because very few patients were attending the medical centre.  What are we to do when work is being carried out on our properties and tradesmen need to park near the property? We have friends come to visit when parking would be prohibited, where would you suggest they park?

We cannot fit two cars on our drive and would have a yellow line outside the house preventing us from parking both our cars. It would be sensible and fair for the small number of households affected in Loyd Close to have residents parking as they do in parts of Oxford.  We feel we are being discriminated against even in Loyd Close alone where some residents would be able to park outside their houses. We are opposed to any parking restrictions proposed in Loyd Close and if parking restrictions are required then residents parking would be the fairest solution.

County Councillor Emily Smith advised that issues with poor parking in this area had been raised with her over the years as a result of people using the medical centre parking across driveways and restricting visibility around this busy junction. A previous scheme put forward a few years ago had not gained public support but there was now s106 funding set aside to pay for parking restrictions and signage in this location.  She had worked with Abingdon Town Council to carry out an informal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/072

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE13).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce a 30mph speed limit on Cumnor Hill in place of the existing 40mph speed limit and also a 30mph speed limit on the Kimmeridge Road residential development as requested by Cumnor Parish Council and, if approved, funded from s106 contributions received from developers, the Area Parish Support budget and Cumnor Parish Council.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed 30mph speed limits as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE13) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce a 30mph speed limit on Cumnor Hill in place of the existing 40mph speed limit and also a 30mph speed limit on the Kimmeridge Road residential development as requested by Cumnor Parish Council and, if approved, funded from s106 contributions received from developers, the Area Parish Support budget and Cumnor Parish Council.

Tom Christophers (Cumnor Parish Council) gave a brief synopsis of the parish of Cumnor and the distinct and unique identities of the several communities which made up a parish with 7,000 residents. For almost a decade those residents had raised concern over the speed driven by traffic along the Cumnor Hill, from the boundary with North Hinksey parish to the centre of Cumnor village, which served as an extension of one of the main arteries out of Oxford. The recent case of a local schoolgirl being struck by a car, however, and the subsequent speed surveys (three) commissioned by Cumnor Parish Council provided evidence that traffic speeds should be lowered to a 30mph speed limit without additional supporting traffic calming measures.

The landscape of this road had changed greatly from when it was first designated and residents and the parish council recognised that it had not moved with the times and was no longer appropriate or sustainable with increased traffic volumes. The environment in the parish had changed considerably and the continued traffic speed was now at odds with the current and forecast future development of the hill. Cumnor Hill served as a thoroughfare to three local schools in Cumnor and North Hinksey parishes and the number of school children that walk and cycle up and down the hill had grown over the years and by formally lowering the speed limit the aim would be to prevent this type of incident as referred to above, or worse, occurring again.

There was a lot of support from within the community to mitigate the inherent danger presented by the volume of traffic travelling at 40mph along this road at present. Cumnor Parish councillors and our district and county councillors unanimously support this proposal and we are confident that this reduction in speed along the Cumnor Hill has the support of those who live within and neighbour the Parish, as well as those who travel through it given the 93% (332/358) who backed the consultation. Furthermore, a local petition had gained 1,859 signatures in support of a reduction to 30mph with a paper copy containing a further 305 signatures.

In urging that the proposal be supported he took the opportunity to ask that if funding could be found by Cumnor Parish Council to cover the cost of reducing the speed limit on the part of Oxford Road currently remaining at 40mph would the Cabinet Member see any issue that would prevent this stretch of road also being lowered to 30mph?

Following advice from officers that that would need further speed survey work and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/075

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE14).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce structural weight limits at the bridges over the Windrush river at Asthall (with the restriction at Asthall also including a width restriction) and Minster Lovell and an administrative amendment to the existing structural weight limit order at the Evenlode river bridge at Charlbury. The proposals have been put forward as a result of a review of structural weight limits required pending maintenance of these bridges. In the case of the bridges across the Windrush river at Asthall and Minster Lovell it is proposed to make permanent the current temporary traffic regulation orders, for which there is a statutory maximum duration of 18 months which is close to expiry.  The proposed amendment to the permanent order for the Evenlode river bridge at Charlbury is for administrative purposes to remove any ambiguity in the order in respect of where the weight restriction applies.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the structural weight limit and width limit at the bridges over the Windrush river at Asthall and Minster Lovell and an administrative correction to the existing structural weight limit order at the Evenlode river bridge at Charlbury as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to introduce structural weight limits at the bridges over the Windrush river at Asthall (with the restriction at Asthall also including a width restriction) and Minster Lovell and an administrative amendment to the existing structural weight limit order at the Evenlode river bridge at Charlbury put forward as a result of a review of structural weight limits required pending maintenance of these bridges. In the case of the bridges across the Windrush river at Asthall and Minster Lovell it was proposed to make permanent the current temporary traffic regulation orders, for which there was a statutory maximum duration of 18 months which was close to expiry.  The proposed amendment to the permanent order for the Evenlode river bridge at Charlbury is for administrative purposes to remove any ambiguity in the order in respect of where the weight restriction applied.

She also noted that County Councillor Nick Field-Johnson supported the proposals along with similar support from Councillor Liz Leffman with regard to the bridge at Charlbury.

Jonathon Stowell (Minster Lovell Parish Council) advised that the bridge at Minster Lovell was an 15^th century 4 arch structure but was in a bad state. A crack had appeared in the main arch with further damage to the walling on both sides caused by large vehicles too big to use the bridge attempting to take the tight turns and in view of that it was felt locally that an 18 tonne limit was too high and that it was frequently breached by 3 axle vehicles. A lower limit would be more suitable.  They were also concerned locally that forthcoming changes to restrictions to the bridge limit in Burford would lead to overspill traffic unless the Minster Lovell bridge was given the same restriction of 7.5 tonnes and therefore the parish council were asking for the limit to be reduced.

Officers confirmed that they were progressing with changes to Burford Bridge along with a 7.5 tonne weight restriction through Minster Lovell commencing at the Asthall Barrow roundabout along Burford Road to Minster Lovell.  That was in connection with the new Downs Road roundabout on the A40 and should prevent lorries over 7.5 tonnes accessing minster Lovell except for access.  However, signing for that was still some way off.

Mr Stowell sought clarification why an 18 tonne limit was being pursued on the bridge when a 7.5 tonne weight restriction was being imposed on roads.

Officers advised a structural limit would still be required for the time being and that the two issues needed to be kept separate.

The Cabinet Member advised Mr Stowell that she needed to make a decision on this issue today due to the expiry of the temporary restriction but that there was nothing to stop Minster Lovell parish Council from putting an application for a 7.5 tonne weight limit and she further undertook that that should be done as part of Oxfordshire County Council’s revenue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13/20

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/037

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE15).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to extend the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Burford Road at the north end of Carterton to reflect adjacent residential development and the construction of a new junction giving access to the development.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed extension of the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Burford Road at the north end of Carterton as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE15) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to extend the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Burford Road at the north end of Carterton to reflect adjacent residential development and the construction of a new junction giving access to the development.

Councillor Nick Field-Johnson supported the proposal.

Noting the support of the local member and the Shilton Parish Council the Cabinet Member having regard to the information set out in the report and the representation made to her at the meeting confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed extension of the 30mph speed limit on the B4020 Burford Road at the north end of Carterton as advertised.

Signed…………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing………………………….

Approved

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/051

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704

Report by Director for Community Operations (Interim) (CMDE16).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation to provide traffic calming give way layouts on the B4020 at Alvescot put forward by Alvescot Parish Council who have undertaken to fund the project subject to approval being given to proceed with the scheme.

The Cabinet Member for the Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the proposed introduction of traffic calming give way layouts on the B4020 at Alvescot.

The Cabinet Member considered a report (CMDE16) presenting responses received to a statutory consultation to provide traffic calming give way layouts on the B4020 at Alvescot put forward by Alvescot Parish Council who have undertaken to fund the project subject to approval being given to proceed with the scheme.

The local member Councillor Ted Fenton had submitted the following comments. Not being an expert in traffic management he felt these things seemed to two drawbacks:

1. Some drivers hurried to get through the ‘chicane’ before they had to wait, increasing the danger.

2. Everyone who had to slow down or stop at one of these was therefore automatically accelerating as they moved through them so even though it was from a slower start or even a standstill they were necessarily getting faster when we would prefer that they were slowing down. Some, of course, took their foot “off the gas” as they reached a reasonable speed but he felt   that many didn’t.

He would far prefer to see visible and tactile speed reduction measures such as bright yellow “rumble strips” at the entrance to villages.

Officers advised that the parish council had been advised to do a local informal consultation which they had done and which had received a lot of support.  They had suggested alternatives as part of that consultation.  Chicanes were generally received favourably and were used throughout the county and seen as being more effective than rumble strips, which had maintenance costs due to wearing out.

Noting the objections which had been on the grounds of necessity but also the strong support for a scheme initiated by the parish council and funded by them following a lot of consultation the Cabinet Member having regard to the information set out in the report and the representations made to her at the meeting including confirmation that chicanes had proved to be effective when used elsewhere she confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the proposed introduction of traffic calming give way layouts on the B4020 at Alvescot.

Signed………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing………………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2020/085

Contact: Hannah Battye, Growth Manager – Central Tel: 07808 573932/Joanne Fellows, Infrastructure Locality Lead – Central Tel: 07990 368897

Report by Assistant Director – Growth & Place (CMDE17).

The report outlines the outcome of an update to the council's Security Bond Policy following an internal audit focusing on bonds. The bond audit, published in April 2018, identified where the bond process could be improved and where further guidance was needed to improve the robustness of the process. The updated Policy outlines clearly when a security bond is needed but also, by assessing the other methods of recovery and enforcement, has reduced the circumstances for when a bond is required whilst still protecting the County Council from financial risk.

The Cabinet Member is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)      approve the revised Security Bond Policy as summarised in paragraphs 16-21 and attached as Annex 1 to the report CMDE18;

(b)      approve the use of the policy in relation to security bonds secured through section 106 agreements for County Council infrastructure and services.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered a report (CMDE17) outlining the outcome of an update to the council's Security Bond Policy following an internal audit focusing on bonds. The bond audit, published in April 2018, identified where the bond process could be improved and where further guidance was needed to improve the robustness of the process. The updated Policy outlined clearly when a security bond was needed but also, by assessing the other methods of recovery and enforcement, had reduced the circumstances for when a bond was required whilst still protecting the County Council from financial risk.

Noting that the policy would speed up and clarify the process the Cabinet Member having regard to the information set out in the report confirmed her decision as follows:

to:

(a)      approve the revised Security Bond Policy as summarised in paragraphs 16-21 and attached as Annex 1 to the report CMDE18;

(b)      approve the use of the policy in relation to security bonds secured through section 106 agreements for County Council infrastructure and services.

Signed……………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing……………………………..

Approved