Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no declarations of interest.

This Cabinet Member for Environment Delegated Decisions meeting will be held virtually in order to conform with current guidelines regarding social distancing. Normally requests to speak at this public meeting are required by 9 am on the day preceding the published date of the meeting. However, during the current situation and to facilitate these new arrangements we are asking that requests to speak are submitted by no later than 9am four working days before the meeting i.e. 9 am on Friday 19 March 2021. Requests to speak should be sent to graham.warrington@oxfordshire.gov.uk. We ask for a written statement of your presentation to ensure that if the technology fails then your views can still be considered. That statement can either be submitted with your request but should in any event be provided no later than 9 am 2 working days before the meeting – Tuesday 23 March 2021).

Where a meeting is held virtually and the addressee is unable to participate virtually a written submission will be accepted.

Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/004

Contact: Judith Coats, Infrastructure Team Lead, Tel: 07554 103335

Report by Assistant Director – Growth & Place (CMDE4).

The Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions (Developer Guide) is aimed at providing the District Councils, developers, planning consultants and other interested parties with a clear view as to the County Council’s expectations for the provision of infrastructure and services in association with new development.

The Developer Guide will provide transparency and consistency in what is sought by the County Council to mitigate against the impact of new development on its services and infrastructure and allowing developers to factor in relevant costs at an early stage of the planning process and contributing to a reduction in delay associated with the planning process.

The Developer Guide sets out:

·           by OCC service area, the infrastructure / services that may be impacted by new development and mitigation that may be sought to make development acceptable in planning terms;

·           the mechanisms by which the provision of infrastructure / services will be sought;

·           other overarching, supporting information such as that relating to population yields, fees, bonds and enforcement and

·           signposts to other supporting information to be available on the website;

and includes information relating to the following service areas:

·           Archaeology

·           Community Services including adult day care, libraries and museums

·           Education, including Special Educational Needs

·           Energy efficiency and use of natural resources

·           Extra care and specialist housing

·           Fire and Rescue Infrastructure

·           Flood and Water Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems

·           Natural Environment

·           Transportation including highways, travel planning, active and healthy travel, public transport and infrastructure and public rights of way

·           Waste Management    

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED:

a)     to approve for publication the Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions as attached at Annex 1, subject to any minor amendments following a final review and formatting;

b)     that the Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions be updated as necessary, to take account of, but not restricted to, technical changes in legislation, Government guidance and County Council policy. 

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE4) the Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions (Developer Guide) which was aimed at providing the District Councils, developers, planning consultants and other interested parties and a clear view as to the County Council’s expectations for the provision of infrastructure and services in association with new development and provide transparency and consistency in what is sought by the County Council to mitigate against the impact of new development on its services and infrastructure. It would also allow developers to factor in relevant costs at an early stage of the planning process and contribute to a reduction in delay associated with the planning process.

Having regard to the information set out in the report before her the Cabinet Member for Environment welcomed the preparation of the Guide and confirmed her decision as follows:

a)        to approve for publication the Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions subject to any minor amendments following a final review and formatting;

b)        that the Oxfordshire County Council Developer Guide to Infrastructure Delivery and Contributions be updated as necessary, to take account of, but not restricted to, technical changes in legislation, Government guidance and County Council policy. 

Signed………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing…………………………….

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/012

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Jim Whiting, Principal Officer – Parking Tel: 07584 581187

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE5).

The report presents the results of an informal consultation on 13 proposed CPZ areas in Oxford which took place between 5 February and 5 March 2021. Based on the outcomes of the informal consultation and other factors including likely future parking pressures e.g. planning permissions and introduction of other demand management proposals in Oxford the Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve carrying out further scheme development and formal consultation on the proposed South Oxford (Extension) Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in Oxford.

While noting that the Cabinet Member for Environment is not being asked to make any decisions regarding the implementation of the South Oxford (Extension) CPZ, rather this would be subject to a separate decision and following the outcomes of a formal consultation.

The report presents the results of an informal consultation on 13 proposed CPZ areas in Oxford which took place between 5 February and 5 March 2021.

Estella Wild (Response Organization) advised that Morrell Crescent specifically was a street of supported accommodation for people with mental health issues, a workplace for 18 members of staff, most of whom travelled from out of the area, on shift patterns where it would not be possible to use public transport to arrive on time to run a reliable and safe service and if within a controlled parking zone with resident permits it would be impossible to run this service as people would not be able to afford to pay the inevitable fines. They also discouraged residents from purchasing cars as they were often not at a place in their recovery where they could take on this responsibility and often not in an economic situation to buy and run a car without hardship.  Morrell Crescent needed to remain as work parking for their staff and also a large number of different visitors who attended their residents including nurses, doctors and other healthcare professionals as well as family members.

Councillor Glynis Phillips (Barton, Sandhills & Risinghurst spoke in support of the officer recommendation to progress to formal consultation later for Barton & Risinghurst. As background she advised that informal consultation had resulted in 63% in Barton and 67% in Risinghurst opposing the proposals and those views needed to be respected. However, if that recommendation was approved she sought an assurance that the CPZ in Sandhills would continue to be on hold as per the decision by the Leader of the Council in the Cabinet Member’s absence which had been despite 69% opposing the scheme to approve the proposals as advertised but defer implementation to try and align the Sandhills scheme with the introduction of a CPZ scheme for the Barton & Risinghurst area subject to funding being available for the latter.  These areas were all interdependent when it came to parking and it was important to avoid issues of displacement parking by either all 3 areas becoming CPZs or none as was the case now.  She supported the status quo until such time as there was a majority from all three communities to become CPZs.

The following written representations were noted.

Peter Baker who understood the need for a CPZ in the South Oxford Extension area being so close to the City Centre but the surrounding estates were just that, housing estates with no commuter or other parking concerns and in some of the proposed areas there were already parking bays for residents to use so it seemed a CPZ could only be required to boost Council coffers and not serve any purpose to the residents of these areas. As a council employee along with every other employee be it Councillor or worker had a duty to the people of Oxford not to make lives less enjoyable and he felt that the proposal had upset a lot of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49/21

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/008

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Mike Wasley, Principal Officer – Traffic Schemes Tel: 07393 001045

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE6).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on various roads in west Bicester to address hazardous and obstructive parking. Funding for consultation on the proposals has been provided from the Councillor Priority Fund for County Councillor Waine and County Councillor Sibley and, if approved, installation of the proposals will be funded from the maintenance budget.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve:

a)      waiting restrictions on Chalvey Road, Danes Road, Dryden Avenue, Dryden Avenue Cul-de-Sac, Huxley Close, Isis Avenue, Kennedy Road, Lawrence Way, Ray Road , Severn Close, St Edith’s Way, Tubb Close, Tweed Crescent and Villiers Road as advertised;

b)     a reduced extent of waiting restrictions on the west side of Hemingway Drive at the request of County Councillor Les Sibley as shown at Annex 4 to the report.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE6) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on various roads in west Bicester to address hazardous and obstructive parking. Funding for consultation on the proposals had been provided from the Councillor Priority Fund for County Councillor Waine and County Councillor Sibley and, if approved, installation of the proposals will be funded from the maintenance budget.

Welcoming the proposals Councillor Sibley also referred to the support proffered by many residents to the on-street parking restrictions proposed at the junction of Lodden Close and Villiers Road with the Middleton Stoney Road, whilst retaining parking spaces for local residents. The traffic orders for Lawrence Way, Chalvey Road and Ray Road were supported as outlined in the report. He also supported the proposal at the Tubbs Close, Danes Road, St Edith’s Way and Kennedy Road crossroads which would improve road safety and visibility issues in the area. He thanked officers for fine tuning the traffic regulations for the Hemingway Drive and Huxley Close proposals as it allowed for on street parking whilst improving road safety and visibility issues. He noted that there had been no objections from residents to the Dryden Avenue, Tweed Crescent and Severn Close proposals or Thames Valley Police, Fire & Rescue, Oxford Bus Company raise and Bicester Town Council who had stressed the need for enforcement.   Addressing concerns from some residents that the introduction of double yellow lines might lead to displacement parking he suggested a review could be carried out following completion of the signage and lines to address any issues that might arise. 

Supporting the proposals County Councillor Michael Waine added that the issues at Buckingham Crescent needed to be seen to be believed. The Crescent a 1930’s development that sat alongside the Buckingham Road in his Division in Bicester comprised short terraces with no garages and limited space for parking inside the curtilage of the properties. Only the entrance was a crescent as most of the houses were in a hammer head that led off the crescent section. The problems it suffered were manifold with parking from near-by businesses across Buckingham Road, including a garage, parking for Bicester North Railway Station and the X5 and S5 buses to Oxford as well as two businesses. It was not unusual to see double, even treble parking, which residents must cope with on a daily basis and these parking problems meant that pedestrians accessing either the shops or their homes often had no footpath available to them and the area immediately in front of these ‘shops’ flooded even after the smallest amount of rain. Over recent years parking problems at the far end of the Crescent had been resolved with efforts underway now to resolve the issues outlined to alleviate the problems and improve the area. The parking proposals needed to be supported in order to support the residents in the Crescent but that further steps could be necessary in the future.

A written representation from Mike Lee emphasised that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50/21

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/007

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Mike Wasley, Principal Officer – Traffic Schemes Tel: 07393 001045

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE7).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed traffic calming measures on the Ploughley Road at Ambrosden funding for which has been provided jointly by Oxfordshire County Council and Ambrosden Parish Council.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve traffic calming measures on the Ploughley Road at Ambrosden as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE7) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed traffic calming measures on the Ploughley Road at Ambrosden funding for which has been provided jointly by Oxfordshire County Council and Ambrosden Parish Council.

County Councillor Dan Sames highlighted the impact of speeding vehicles on  residents and it would only be a matter of time before a serious injury, possibly a fatality, occured within the village. Over the past 4 years he had worked with the Parish Council and county officers to bring about traffic calming to address this problem of vehicles travelling through at speed. These proposals would bring significant benefits to the village as traffic is slowed entering and leaving the village on the Ploughley Road and hopefully changing driver behaviour and the nature of the road from a long straight road with no obstructions to one where traffic naturally moved at lower speeds. The neighbouring village of Arncott had similar build outs which had seen a reduction of speed while allowing traffic to flow easily and the hope was that that would be replicated in Ambrosden. The build outs proposed had also been designed to minimise potential damage to vehicles. There was overwhelming support (70%) for these measures and even the majority of those that had objected acknowledged that some action was required to reduce speed.

The Cabinet Member noted written representations from Kathleen Cooper, Harry Meacher and Roy Seaward in support of the proposals.

The Cabinet Member for Environment endorsed the view that these proposals were long overdue and 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 traffic calming measures on the Ploughley Road at Ambrosden as advertised.

Signed………………………………………

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing…………………………….

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/015

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Rebecca Crowe, Transport Planner (Infrastructure Locality – South & Vale) Tel: 07833 401067

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE8).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on the proposals outlined in the recommendation below.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the following as advertised:

Chilton Road

a)           30mph Speed Limit – from its current terminal point, to the junction with Hagbourne Hill, replacing in the whole existing 40mph speed limit as a result.

b)            Banned Turning movements from Hagbourne Hill into Chilton Road from both directions, supported by No entry signs at the junction for vehicles approaching from the west.

c)           Traffic Calming Chicane (to be wide enough to accommodate non-standard cycles & wheelchairs) to be located on Chilton Road approx. 5 metres from Hagbourne Hill.

d)           Gate feature (with 1.5-metre-wide cycle bypass) to be located approx. 240 metres west of London Road.

e)           Raised table approximately 6 metres long, sited approximately 80 metres west of London Road

A417 London Road

f)            a Toucan Crossing (controlled crossing for use by pedestrians & pedal cycles) to be located on London Road approx. 12 metres South of Chilton Road

Station Road

g)           Raised table approximately 14.5 metres long, sited at its junction with London Road

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on the provision traffic management measures, speed Limit and toucan crossing on Chilton Road, Station Road and A417 London Road, Upton.

Katie Napper a resident on the farm at the bottom of Hagbourne Hill.  The Harwell “bypass” and the increased vehicular access to the A34 at Chilton had already increased the volume of traffic which had now been exacerbated by the closure of Chilton Road.  The road was extremely busy even during lockdown n and she had no doubt that traffic, post lockdown, would increase further and a cursory inspection today showed significant damage to the edges of the road as evidence of an increasing volume of traffic using it.  Without the turn in and out of Chilton Road the traffic is moving faster and there had been two accidents, one a fatality, since lockdown started, where speed had undoubtedly been a contributory factor. The junction was not on the crest of the hill, and the road curved slightly too.  The junction was invisible to drivers coming from Chilton, until just 5 seconds away giving little time to spot pedestrians and make a decision about slowing or stopping.  Similarly, pedestrians are unable to clearly see oncoming traffic from the Chilton direction. Her main concern was for slower users, parents with pushchairs, kids on their own bikes – to whom Chilton Road would be an attractive option as it had such a smooth and easy-to-use surface. Upton already had the Lynchway, an ancient track, which crossed no roads, and allowed traffic-free access to both the Ridgeway and the Harwell Campus area & beyond, for cyclists and walkers.  Her three main objections were the movement of their large vehicles from Hagbourne Hill Farm onto the hill road at the junction in question as they were slow moving and the closure of the Chilton Road had removed the natural slowing of other traffic which had previously allowed relatively safe access to the hill road for large vehicles. Vehicles leaving their own farm premises to join the stream of traffic at peak times. Finally, they did not agree that this use of the junction at the top of Chilton Road was, as Sustrans suggests, “making walking, wheeling & cycling safer”, especially when a safe, traffic-free alternative already existed.   Consideration needed to be given to the safety of the junction at the top as with increasing volumes of traffic, that crossing wouldl become even more dangerous.

Janice Bridger re-inforced the request of British Horse Society that horse traffic was accommodated in this project. Removal of motor traffic from Chilton Road would attract use by horse riders to access the good equestrian rights of way network in the area and thus the project was welcomed but there was no mention of horse traffic in the plans. They had read the Council’s response to the Society’s representation and welcomed the statement that their requests would be looked at but they were concerned that the report gave reasons why horses could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52/21

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/009

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Jane Clark, Road Safety Officer Tel: 07545 459107

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (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 districts put forward following requests from residents, including – where a new place has been requested - an assessment of eligibility, applying national guidelines for provision of such parking places.  

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the

proposed provision of Disabled Persons Parking Places (DPPP) at: Gassons Mead, Alvescot (x2); New Road, Bampton; Bretch Hill, Banbury; Sandford Green, Banbury; Withycombe Drive, Banbury; Lerwick Croft, Bicester; Ashcombe Close, Witney; Woodgreen, Witney and Queen Street, Eynsham.

But defer approval of the proposals at the following locations pending further investigations: Edmunds Road, Banbury; Queens Road, Banbury; Dunkins Close, Bicester; Walterbush Road, Chipping Norton and The Crofts, Witney.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE9) 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 districts put forward following requests from residents, including.  

Representations in support of proposals within their respective divisions had been received from County Councillor Mark Cherry (Banbury Ruscote), County Councillor Hilary Hibbert-Biles (Chipping Norton) and County Councillor Charles Mathew (Eynsham).

Having regard to the information set out in the report before her and noting the responses received from the local members the cabinet Member for Environment confirmed her decision as follows:

(a)          to approve provision of Disabled Persons Parking Places (DPPP) at: Gassons Mead, Alvescot (x2); New Road, Bampton; Bretch Hill, Banbury; Sandford Green, Banbury; Withycombe Drive, Banbury; Lerwick Croft, Bicester; Ashcombe Close, Witney; Woodgreen, Witney and Queen Street, Eynsham.

(b)          defer approval of proposals at the following locations pending further investigations: Edmunds Road, Banbury; Queens Road, Banbury; Dunkins Close, Bicester; Walterbush Road, Chipping Norton and The Crofts, Witney.

Signed……………………………………….

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing……………………………..

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/006

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Jason Sherwood, Growth Manager (South & Vale) Tel: 07795 684708

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE10).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on B4017 Bath Street Abingdon and follows a consultation on the same restrictions carried out in December 2018 and January 2019 and which were approved at the Cabinet Member for Environment delegated decisions meeting on 14 February 2019. As the restrictions were not implemented within the statutory maximum period of two years from the start of the consultation it was necessary to carry out a further consultation. Funding for the proposals has been provided by the developers of land north of Abingdon.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the waiting restrictions on B4017 Bath Street, Abingdon as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE10) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on B4017 Bath Street Abingdon. This followed a consultation on the same restrictions carried out in December 2018 and January 2019 and which were approved by the Cabinet Member for Environment on 14 February 2019 but not implemented within the statutory maximum period of two years from the start of the consultation and therefore requiring a further consultation.

The following written representations were reported:

Jim Halliday - “Changes to the Parking regulations:  Whilst removing 54m of parking might seem to be a worthwhile exercise – I think that its impact on safe cycling will be at best minimal; but the impact on residents will be major. For many years there have been ongoing parking issues on the roads of the Fitzharry’s Estate – I am concerned that the total removal of parking from this layby will simply result in the car owners deciding they will park on the Fitzharry’s Estate instead - as I strongly suspect that many of the cars parking in this layby belong to residents from the southern stretch of Bath Street who do not have off-street parking. Certainly changing the regulations from a restriction from Mon-Sat 0800-1800 to 24 hours every day will have a major impact on local residents – particularly in the evenings. Whilst I feel that the removal of 54m of parking will contribute little to safer cycling I wish to withdraw my objection to the proposed change in parking regulations. However, should the scheme proceed I would ask that careful consideration is given to the design of the cycle lane - in particular how far it extends at the southern end, its width (I have checked and the current Bath Street cycle lane is definitely narrower than other cycle lanes in the town), and its surface treatment (I would suggest when it passes the parked cars at the northern end, perhaps coloured tarmac or very frequent painted cycle symbols may be appropriate). Therefore, for both the parking and safe cycling reasons listed above, I object to the plan and would suggest that there are other places in Abingdon where the money planned to be spent on this scheme could be spent to give much better benefit to cyclists and would urge the County Council to think again.”

Robin Tucker Oxfordshire Cycling Network – “We support the proposals.  This is a busy route for cycling as it is the main route to the centre from the John Mason and Fitzharrys secondary schools and Abingdon & Witney college.  It is difficult section because the road narrows.  We consider is sensible to prioritise people who wish to use the road for movement using a sustainable mode of transport, rather than the non-movement of private cars, although we appreciate the proposal will cause some inconvenience to people who normally park here. We note Abingdon School’s objection – however, Abingdon School’s entrances are in Faringdon Road and Park Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54/21

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/013

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/Michelle Plowman, Principal Engineer (Road Agreements Team S&V)

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE11).

This report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed amended traffic calming measures on the Hanney Road at Steventon. The new layout comprises the addition of a flat top road hump within the western of the two currently existing build outs with the eastern build-out being removed.  The proposals are being put forward to accommodate a new access to residential development on the south west side of the road and are being fuinded by developers of adjacent land

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve the traffic calming measures on the Hanney Road at Steventon as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE11) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed amended traffic calming measures on the Hanney Road at Steventon comprising the addition of a flat top road hump within the western of the two currently existing build outs with the eastern build-out being removed.  The proposals were being put forward to accommodate a new access to residential development on the south west side of the road and funded by developers of adjacent land.

Officers confirmed that because of concerns over speed of large vehicles provision was for a full width cushion and that there would be a road safety audit carried out and also after installation.

Recognising concerns expressed over the maintenance of Hanney Road the Cabinet Member was unable to address that at this meeting but hoped that that work would be scheduled for attention.  Having regard to the information set out in the report before her together with the representations received at the meeting she confirmed her decision as follows:

to approve the traffic calming measures on the Hanney Road at Steventon as advertised.

Signed……………………………………..

Cabinet Member for Environment

Date of signing……………………………

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/017

Contact: Hugh Potter, Group Manager – Area Operations Hub Tel: 07766 998704/James Wright, Traffic & Traffic Schemes Technical Officer

Report by Corporate Director, Environment and Place (CMDE12).

The report presents responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on various roads in Witney to address hazardous or obstructive parking. Funding for the proposals has been provided by developers of adjacent land in respect of the proposals at Avenue Two and from the Oxfordshire County Council revenue budget in respect of the other locations.

The Cabinet Member for Environment is RECOMMENDED to approve waiting restrictions at:

a)        Corndell Gardens

b)        The Newland area

c)        The Crofts

d)        Avenue Two

as advertised.

The Cabinet Member for Environment considered (CMDE12) responses received to a statutory consultation on proposed waiting restrictions on various roads in Witney to address hazardous or obstructive parking. Funding for the proposals had been provided by developers of adjacent land in respect of the proposals at Avenue Two and from the Oxfordshire County Council revenue budget in respect of the other locations.

Steve Harris set out the history to this application with regard to The Crofts which in his opinion had been wrongly approved and strongly advising a site visit to appreciate the loss of 2 spaces, the planning application and safety of this junction. Regarding Corndell Gardens he set out a number of points  and objection. At this point in time there was no pressure on on-street parking at Corndell Gardens with no one parking on the area where the double yellow lines were proposed. During the construction of Old Orchard Court vehicles associated with the construction had parked there on regular occasions but that had not been the case since December 2020 and had not noticed anyone else parked there either when they were on site 5 days a week. The residents of Corndell Gardens had made a problem out of something that might happen in the future.  There was no evidence that parking in Corndell Gardens iwa a problem. Corndell Gardens. He was also concerned on behalf of the future residents of Old Orchard Court that if the double yellow lines were implemented then additional vehicles from either Corndell Gardens or Old Orchard Court requiring parking would have no alternative but to park in front of the entrance to Old Orchard Court causing obstruction to the residents of the 18 flats where there were no double yellow lines. Surely double yellow lines there would be more appropriate and only once the apartments were fully occupied and a full survey carried out. He believed the most important element was to reinstate the highway whether it be pedestrian or vehicle which would then allow any overflow parking requirements to be widely available to all.

Kelly Harris spoke in support of removal of the single yellow line from the corner of Church Lane to past the Griffin Pub. However, they were disappointed that after 5 years of talks and tribunals with WODC around parking issues at their in Newland, Witney that the line removal proposal was now not being extended to include their property.  This situation been ongoing since Sept 2016 had caused much unnecessary stress and it was literally a daily nightmare to find a parking space close to their house. Not only affected residents but staff from the industrial estate were all fighting daily for a very small number of street parking spaces in King Fisher Crescent opposite or the lay-by starting at The Carpenters. Including the lining up to our property would relieve Newlands parking issues for us plus 2 of our neighbours.  Having moved into the property in 2009 there were for the first 7 years  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56/21