Agenda item

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/182

Contact: Naomi Barnes, Project Manager Tel: 07824 528681

This item will be considered and determined by the Leader of the Council, Cllr Liz Leffman. 

The Council’s Constitution (Article 6, paragraph 7(b)) enables the Leader to take a decision herself, or to nominate another member of Cabinet, if the designated Portfolio Holder is unable for any reason to take the decision.

In a report to the Cabinet Member Decision (CMD) meeting on 29 July officers recommended that the Cabinet Member (a) note the responses to the non-statutory public consultation on the East Oxford low traffic neighbourhood including Quietways, (b) agree that officers review the options based on the consultation output, update the proposals and reconsult, (c) agree that the outcome of consultation on revised proposals be reported to a future CMD meeting and (d) instruct officers to fully assess the impact of the delay on resources and budget on the wider Active Travel programme. These recommendations were accepted by the Cabinet Member. As a result of the CMD decision the following stakeholders were contacted to discuss their concerns and alternative options: local mosques; local taxi companies; disability groups; local schools; the council’s Special Educational Needs Transport team; the Emergency Services and waste collection services. A targeted consultation exercise on the position of the traffic filter and overall design was also undertaken with the residents and businesses of Howard Street. Feedback from the engagement with stakeholders has been used to develop the recommendations of this report.

The Cabinet Member for Highway Management advised that in the light of some concern about recent comments he had made regarding this item, which some members of the public had considered might affect his impartiality, Councillor Liz Leffman the Leader of the Council would, under the provisions of Article 6 of the Council’s Constitution, take the Chair for Item 4. Although he was very clear as was the Leader of the Council that he did not have a predetermined view on this matter he was stepping away from this particular item because he wanted the public to have every confidence in the decision making of the Council and demonstrate his impartiality. He would then resume the Chair for the remainder of the meeting.

The Leader of the Council then took the Chair for the duration of Item 4.

On 29 July 2021 the Cabinet Member for Highway Management had resolved as follows:

(a) to note the responses to the non-statutory public consultation on the East Oxford low traffic neighbourhood including Quietways,

(b) agree that officers review the options based on the consultation output, update the proposals and reconsult,

(c)     agree that the outcome of consultation on revised proposals be reported to a future CMD meeting and

(d)     instruct officers to fully assess the impact of the delay on resources and budget on the wider Active Travel programme. 

In accordance with that decision the following stakeholders had then been contacted: local mosques; local taxi companies; disability groups; local schools; the council’s Special Educational Needs Transport team; Emergency Services and waste collection services. A targeted consultation exercise on the position of the traffic filter and overall design had also been undertaken with residents and businesses in Howard Street. Feedback from that engagement had been used to develop the current recommendations of the report now being considered by the Leader of the Council.

City Councillor Katherine Miles also speaking as a local resident in one of the proposed East Oxford LTNs said that failure to implement the LTN would undermine both the county and city council’s plans for sustainable transportation and climate change related infrastructure initiatives and risk bidding for future rounds of central government funding. The East Oxford LTNs were a learning pilot exercise founded on growing evidence based on the benefits of LTNs elsewhere and so implementing them now would confer new insights not just for East Oxford, but for the whole of the city and help inform the development of a strategy for sustainable traffic management in the city. It would also benefit the health, safety, and wellbeing of city residents including children who would be able to walk and cycle safely through the neighbourhood providing cheap, efficient and good exercise as well as benefitting the environment. Sadly many people did not cycle with children due to the current levels of traffic and although cycling was not in itself dangerous through traffic in East Oxford with traffic aggressively cutting through from the Iffley to Cowley Roads made it so as did other vehicles driving through St Mary’s only to park on the pavement at the intersection of the Cowley Road which forced pedestrians to walk in the road despite there being a car park meters away. LTNs were not a panacea to all the transportation woes of the city but they were one part of the solution.

City Councillor Jemima Hunt spoke as a city councillor for St Clements. Acknowledging the overwhelming support for these LTNs she looked forward to working with councillors and officers to ensure their success through further community engagement and data monitoring. In 1985 three streets had been chosen to have a barrier placed halfway down it and that single act of installing a barrier had changed lives for the better. Union Street and Divinity Road were also given traffic barriers. Union St remained shut to through traffic but Divinity Road by far the longest of the roads was, however, reopened to traffic after three months because then, as now, it was deemed too convenient a cut-through for vehicles moving across our city to allow it to remain shut. But by reopening Divinity Road to traffic, the council had relegated this section of East Oxford to inner ring road status exacerbated by the doubling of cars on our roads in the past 10 years and the use of Google Maps to cut across cities. In East Oxford between 7 and 9am and 4 and 8 pm cars, most of which were transporting one person wedged themselves into narrow residential streets causing gridlock, pollution and danger to cyclists and pedestrians and it wasn’t uncommon to see cars mounting pavements, reversing round blind corners, speeding and crashing. Then in 2019 a successful bid was made for tranche 2 funding from the active travel fund specifically designed to support implementation of LTNs with £2.9 million allocated for the allocation of our LTNs. Lessons had been learnt from the success of the Cowley LTN and if funding was not spent there was the very real threat of losing out on further funding for active travel schemes. She urged that the trial in St Clements proceed in order to help the city move forward and provide a safer, healthier future for everyone through people friendly streets.

Danny Yee considered it impossible to properly enable active travel within, from and across East Oxford without the LTNs.  There was currently no accessible cycling route between East Oxford and Headington but the Divinity Road LTN would, along with the Quickways, provide that.  There was currently too much traffic on Magdalen Road and Howard Street for the slower and less confident to cycle on them or for two-way cycling to be allowed.  This was a major barrier not only to trips within the St Marys area but to trips across it from Cowley to the city centre or from Donnington Bridge to Headington. Every minor road junction along Iffley and Cowley Roads was a collision hotspot stopping many people cycling there at all, or letting children even walk by themselves.  LTNs by removing the larger part of the turning traffic at these junctions would make routes through them accessible to a broader range of people and reduce accidents and injuries. These active travel routes needed to be enabled before Connecting Oxford and if people were to be encouraged to stop driving then there should be provision for a range of alternatives including safe and accessible walking and cycling routes as well as buses. He urged the LTNs be approved but possibly delaying implementation slightly if that synchronised better with Connecting Oxford.

Nick Welch for The Divinity Road Area Residents Association welcomed implementation of the East Oxford LTNs having campaigned for them for many years. These roads were designed for residents who lived on them and not as an inner urban cut through and living in their neighbourhood meant having to endure the daily inhalation of exhaust fumes and the risks for children and all those who were walking and trying to cycle to their school or work. Divinity Road had 6000 vehicle movements a day and how LTNs impacted on wider traffic movement had been an important consideration in their local consultations as well as the contribution LTNs would make to the overall objectives of Connecting Oxford. They asked the County and City Councils to show their commitment to active travel and implement the LTN schemes that were already funded. They understood that the traffic filters on Divinity and Southfield roads would be implemented in March 2022 but wanted to stress the importance of clear communications in the run-up to help drivers to rethink their routes. Clear signage would be crucial and the City and County Councils needed to work together with residents to ensure that LTNs were successful and transformative for our neighbourhoods.

John Skinner spoke against implementation. Citing a lack of democracy in the process he had acute concerns regarding access for emergency services and the impact of the proposals on business in the middle of a resurgent pandemic

Richard Parnham stated that over the past year and a half, Oxfordshire County Council had actively made life miserable for a significant percentage of the population and visitors to Oxford through bus gate proposals, cutting off the West of the city from East and North Oxford to all motor vehicles; new controlled parking zones across Oxford (including East Oxford) which had been implemented in the face of strong opposition from residents who could not understand what problem CPZs were intended to fix; three “Experimental” LTNs around Cowley and Florence Park which had, since their introduction, been subject to significant opposition.  With regard to the three planned LTNs in East Oxford the County Council could only claim popular support for this scheme if it cherry picked selected findings, from a sub-set of the total number of consultation respondents. However, in reality most respondents to the East Oxford LTN consultation opposed the scheme with net support at minus 9.4% for Divinity Road, minus 15.2% for St Mary’s and minus 12% for St Clements. There were then plans for Quickways, more LTNs, car park levy and an expanded ZEZ. Why was the Council choosing to do all this now causing stress to thousands of people across Oxfordshire during the worst 18 months of most of our lives? It seemed to him that the council had decided that people’s lifestyles weren’t acceptable and were forcing lifestyle changes on them and that it was imperative to spend its Active Travel grant money, no matter what the consequences were for those affected. In summary the County Council was rushing through a whole series of closely-related transport proposals while largely disregarding the consultation feedback it had been given and implementing and retaining schemes in the face of widespread opposition and resisting any changes to those schemes despite them supposedly being “experimental” in nature.

Sadiea Mustafa Awan a resident of Littlemore queried the efficacy of the primarily digital consultation carried out which she considered had disenfranchised working class, disabled and ethnic minorities in Oxford City. Those groups had the least access to such engagement and Oxford City had the highest ethnic minority population in the South East outside of London, which was also more likely to be working class. Therefore, without intending to be so LTNs were not only a form of socioeconomic discrimination but also institutional racism. Public meetings had been proposed to address this shortcoming with a suggestion for paper consultations to be made available and assistance offered to complete them but that had been abandoned due to Covid, although it had been suggested that cancellation had been for reasons unrelated to Covid and only 300 paper forms had been submitted in the consultation. That level of involvement in an issue as important as this was unacceptable and appeared deliberately orchestrated. It was also documented that working class people contributed the least to climate change but were least able to adapt, unless resources were provided.  It had also been suggested that results in the areas selected for LTNs such as Divinity Road, which had some of the most expensive houses in the city had been manipulated to give the views of a privileged middle-class elite more prominence. She wanted to believe that this progressive alliance had the best intentions but it needed to be seen to balance real, lasting sustainable change to the City's transport structure to address climate change against harming and affecting the most vulnerable.  The County Council should not implement further LTNs, unless steps were taken to improve levels of consultation to reflect the views of all levels of the community rather than an elitist minority.

Lise Bosher on behalf of Peter McIntyre who had been unable to attend advised that he had spoken at the meeting in July against the proposed LTN for St Mary’s and in favour of a slow traffic neighbourhood to focus on the need to reduce speed, increase safety, encourage walking and reduce emissions, without closing roads. Despite making a plea for local discussion the County Council had failed to engage with the community and the six months since July had been largely wasted with no meaningful consultation only a repetition of the LTN proposal.  His local county councillor had refused to discuss the slow traffic proposal on the grounds that he believed in the benefits of LTNs and had rejected a plea for a more inclusive conversation despite conducting traffic surveys and sharing those results. He and his partner had given up their car last year and were taking action to reduce their carbon footprint but believed that LTNs were simply displacing traffic, causing extra pollution on those roads where cars would be diverted and creating privileged and non-privileged areas. The County Council needed to take a step back and look for agreement on alternative solutions to LTNs which were available and would receive greater support. He had lived in St Mary’s for more than 40 years and had never experienced a proposal that had caused so much division and been pursued with so little regard for local democracy.  The policy debate had been manipulated and had marginalised many in the community. The LTN was referred to as a trial but it had no baseline data, no end point and no criteria on which it could be judged.

Robin Tucker for the Oxfordshire Cycling Network and Co-Chair of the Coalition for Healthy Streets and Active Travel referred to the full and comprehensive consultation process undertaken since the last decision in July 2021. This had been a representative survey hand delivered to residents of Howard Street and so hard to defraud by faking a postcode or multiple responses. The result with showed 70% support with 13% objecting with more than 5 supporters for every 1 against was very much in line with representative surveys from other LTNs. The benefits of LTNs were many and proven and mostly about the basic fairness of reducing harm by others. They reduced the exposure of residents to air pollution and based on London experience reduced the risk of road casualties by half and freed the streets from the intimidation of constant traffic, with drivers who just wanted to get through in the quickest time. Some people would still choose to drive with the inevitable consequences for health and climate but in line with the majority of respondents and residents who had made their desires clear the LTNs should be approved.

Speaking on behalf of Royal Cars Qasim Mohammed stated that LTN’s already installed throughout Cowley had already had a major impact on their trade and the general traffic flow in Oxford and the additional affect that the proposed East Oxford LTN would have would only make that worse. The taxi industry was the most experienced on the roads of Oxford and their comments should hold a considerable amount of weight. They opposed the current scheme believing that it would only benefit a minority while causing chaos for so many especially the taxi industry and closure of all roads starting along the Cowley Road, which was the heartbeat of the local economy, would be catastrophic.  As evident from the Cowley trial the main road would be gridlocked with traffic overflowing into the centre, Marston and Headington with direct routes to the hospitals and Universities cut preventing them as a company from providing an efficient service to consumers who had appointments, classes and exams to get to. Local businesses would also suffer with the footfall of trade falling as evidenced by figures from the Templars Square shopping centre.  Services for the young and vulnerable would also be affected as they were currently Oxfordshire County Council’s largest provider with approximately 125 active SEN routes. As well as providing an efficient service to the student community in the area.  They disagreed with the view that in the long term the scheme would benefit the taxi trade but felt that this new measure following a difficult covid period would be the end of their trade. Blocking roads and trying to force people out of their cars is not the solution to high traffic levels and alternatives needed to be considered and to that end they had previously presented a one-way system to the county council, which had been ignored as it didn’t meet the criteria for the funding that was available whereas the proposal for the East Oxford LTN would be a disaster for the road network.

Claire Boyns asked why, following a consultation earlier in the year with the majority of respondents objecting to the proposals, including 80% of businesses and which had then led to the postponement of the East Oxford LTN in July, there had since then only been limited discussions with only a small number of stakeholders, while the majority of the earlier consultees had been excluded from the process. Also, where meetings had taken place with stakeholders it appeared that their substantial concerns had not been materially addressed. The majority of respondents had objected to the proposals in the first place because of a total absence of a coherent transport strategy to reduce traffic. The proposed LTNs were not the result of a top-down plan but the accumulation of piecemeal and unrelated schemes from local pressure groups seizing an opportunity to improve their immediate locality by targeting government active travel funding. LTNs, if implemented, would only improve the environment of a few at the expense of the many who lived, worked and travelled on the few available main roads that were already congested at peak times and which would be under increased pressure if the Quickways scheme went ahead.  LTNs discriminated against those who could not afford to live in central Oxford but needed to travel into Oxford but were then faced with a diminishing public transport likely to deteriorate further by recently announced bus route cuts. The County Council’s Fair Deal Alliance had an obligation to all residents of Oxfordshire to push for schemes that reduced overall private vehicle use within the ring road, whether that be a road pricing scheme or strategically placed bus gates and an obligation to all the residents of Oxford who deserved cleaner air and clearer streets.  If overall traffic volumes were reduced then LTN schemes might not be so controversial or so necessary.  The proposal to implement them now was divisive and illogical and she urged they be rejected.

Alison Hill for Cyclox urged approval of the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in East Oxford. The County Council had stated that reducing motor vehicle traffic was an urgent priority for the council and must happen quickly but as it was extremely difficult to change people’s long-term habits that would require interventions on many fronts and low traffic neighbourhoods were an essential element in that behaviour change programme, alongside Connecting Oxford, the ZEZ, more parking restrictions, improving the cycle network, bus service improvements, creation of 15-minute neighbourhoods, the activation programmes run by Active Oxfordshire, to name but a few. All of these would clearly benefit from an integrated approach but the piecemeal way in which schemes were funded made that impossible and so a failure to approve the East Oxford LTNs would set the problem back months and even years.  Going by car might feel safe but cycling and walking were safe too and improved health and the environment in so many other ways.  Action was needed now and although congestion might increase in the short term she saw that as a price worth paying.

Mazar Doghar advised that these divisive LTNproposals had totally fragmented and divided entire communities, which had, before, all lived in peace and harmony. On 29 July 2021 we were told that the consultation results were for a conclusive rejection of the LTN’s and yet the Cabinet Member for Highway Management had stated publicly at meetings and on twitter that they would be passed while placating everyone else by saying there would be further consultations with the 4 Mosques, businesses and other vested interest groups. That consultation meant an online workshop for businesses where 13 out of 300+ had attended and where no response had been made to the total 100% rejection by all present of the proposed LTNs other than “let them come in and bed in, you will see the difference”. That had been an utter disgrace and embarrassment, showing nothing but contempt for those family-owned businesses that were the lifeblood of the multicultural spread of East Oxford where nearly 70% of businesses were owned by ethnic persons and a customer base coming in from all of Oxfordshire. The 4 mosques had unanimously rejected the LTN proposal and despite repeatedly highlighting the issues to the Cabinet Member their comments had fallen on deaf ears. The LTN proposals had been advocated by lobby groups with a 100% white membership such as Cyclox, Cohsats, OLS all of whom were main advocates for the LTNs. East Oxford was made up of a huge multicultural spread of religions & nationalities with 10000 Muslims attending the 4 mosques and using the shops, cafes and other businesses on the Cowley Rd and by making a decision today to implement these LTN’s the County Council was stating to this multicultural community that they did not matter and that it had no regard for their religious faith or the businesses and communities that they used and lived in. With elected representatives appearing to mock the religions and calling for boycotts of shops with anti LTN banners this was not council that appeared to respect religion & people of all nationalities and he hoped the response of this multicultural society would be evident in the forthcoming May 2022 local elections.

Emily Kerr a mother of three children under 7 who did not own a car frequently found herself scared of the aggressive driving and pavement parking which took place on the route to school, which had to be traversed daily and where there had been incidents and many near misses. For so long the debate had centred around the rights of people commuting to work by car but it was important to look after people who were involved in many short journeys around a local area and who believed that children had the right to travel safely to school and that everyone should be able to walk around their local area without feeling at risk from dangerously driven cars.  Currently 3 generations of her family could now cycle using the LTNs and every time they did they saw people using the road who would previously have been too vulnerable to do so and from being neutral on the benefits of LTNs she was now very much in favour. The only way to reduce driving and the dangers and disadvantages of cars was to make it more expensive or less convenient and by doing that it would inevitably attract outrage from people who did not want to be inconvenienced but people had the right to get around their city safely and asked that the trial scheme be implemented and monitored and its effects reported.

Scott Urban asked that the three trial low-traffic neighbourhoods be implemented. While there would never be a perfect time to do this we could not afford to let the funding slip away. Vigorous efforts were needed to ensure the optimum flow of buses as clearly buses were stuck because there were too many private-car journeys, including school runs. The LTNs would help via modal shift (traffic evaporation) but listed the following additional steps to reduce the number of privately owned vehicle journeys:

·      Implement Connecting Oxford on an experimental basis

·      Extend the ZEZ to encompass the Westgate Centre

·      Make city-centre car parks disabled-only

·      Accelerate the rollout of ‘school streets’ schemes

·      Ensure that the Oriel Square bollard was always working

·      Move forward with Quickways

·      Accelerate CPZ rollout

·      Move parking or loading bays that blocked bus routes

·      Enforce urban clearways (e.g. Hollow Way)

Sajad Khan for COLTA considered that the taxi trade was once again being ignored in such an important decision and rather than being seen as part of the solution to Oxford’s congestion problem it appeared they were considered to be a part of the problem because they had been restricted to access through the proposed LTNs. Along with the Cowley LTNs, East Oxford LTNs would further complicate journeys by placing obstacles in their paths and prove to be a disaster for their trade. East Oxford was a busy area for taxis with regular pick up and drop off of passengers and by being continuously lumped in with the general traffic would prevent providing an efficient service to passengers. All main routes would now be congested including routes towards the Headington hospitals with inevitable missed appointments.  They had made a substantial investment to ensure that by 2025 all of their current vehicles would be zero emission capable yet despite that the county council was preventing them from accessing routes within Oxford.  They needed unrestricted access through all roads in Oxford and they could not accept further restrictions, which would increase the already negative impact on their business.

County Councillor Robin Bennett felt the proposals being considered sent a strong signal in support of the County Council’s principles. As a medieval city Oxford presented immense difficulties but there was a clear need to do something to manage the transport issues. This was just a start of a package of measures to improve the situation and although a County Councillor from outside the City he was familiar with the area and supported implementation.

County Councillor Andrew Gant referred to the overall growth of traffic in Oxford, which in turn affected the safety, amenity, air quality and freedom of movement for thousands. The County Council’s Alliance was committed to delivering an inclusive and integrated and sustainable travel network with reduced car travel at its centre and as evidenced by the many emails he received it was clear something needed to be done to address these issues and in view of the overwhelming support for these proposals, including the City Council, he supported implementation.

County Councillor Charlie Hicks considered the LTNs a positive policy very much in line with the County Council’s transport aims. The main criticism levelled at the proposals seemed to be that it would divert traffic to other roads causing gridlock but evidence from schemes elsewhere, which had been in operation some time, suggested that while improvements wouldn’t happen overnight levels of traffic would reduce overtime.  He supported implementation but urged that the County and City Councils work closely together.

County Councillor Damian Haywood reiterated his comments from the July meeting in support of these proposals and hoped that the communities would come together to make this work.  The County Council had a clear mandate through the Fair Deal Alliance to promote its transport policies to help reduce climate change locally, make a difference to people’s lives and roads much safer and make a decision to proceed now.

County Councillor Liam Walker referred to the high levels of opposition to the proposals from many sections of the local community including mosques, schools, taxi and bus companies and the leader of the City Council’s Labour group calling for it to be deferred and yet the County Council’s Alliance administration in the face of that opposition seemed intent on pushing on regardless on the basis that it was in line with their stated priorities on climate action, health and wellbeing of residents, inequalities and delivery of sustainable and integrated transport networks whereas, in fact, LTNs met none of those criteria as evidenced by the level of opposition.   Also, it appeared that comments from disability groups had not been featured.  The County Council needed to listen to these concerns and remove LTNs. It was the wrong approach and highlighted the lack of integrated planning to address congestion.

The Leader of the Council noted written representations from Anthony Cheke and Chloe Clark which had been tabled in full and thanked all the speakers and  indeed everyone who had taken part in the discussions and debates around LTNs to date. It was clear that there was a wide range of views on the merits of these measures but the County Council’s Alliance was committed to activating the mandate given to it to address climate change, improve road safety and traffic congestion and ensure the health and wellbeing of its residents and  believed that the East Oxford LTNs were an important element in helping to deliver those priorities. LTNs were not a complete solution but a stepping-stone towards behavioral change with much work yet to do to make our roads fit for the future and tackle the pressing issue of the climate emergency. This work could and would not happen overnight and change would come incrementally but LTNs were part of the journey to zero carbon transport and formed part of a much wider strategy to transform how people moved around the county.  Many other measures needed to be taken to ensure the success of LTNs and she understood the concerns expressed by those opposed to these measures but the county council would continue to have honest conversations with everyone to deliver a transport plan that worked for all and to that end had over the last year engaged with residents, businesses, schools, emergency services, waste collection services and other interested parties. Concerns expressed about access to streets had been addressed so that all streets within the LTNs would continue to be accessible to residents, emergency services, visitors and deliveries by car or van. A number of quietways facilitated by traffic filters as part of the LTNs would also be implemented to guide cyclists on quieter routes through the Cowley and East Oxford LTNs. A decision on whether to extend the trial, make the LTNs permanent or remove the LTNs would be made following the ETRO trial period and would be based on feedback received during that period, along with data collected on traffic and air quality during that time.

Therefore, having regard to the information set out in the report before her together with the representations made to her at the meeting both in person and in writing the Leader of the Council confirmed her decision as follows:

(a)          in recognition of the Fair Deal Alliance’s priorities to approve the implementation of the East Oxford Low Traffic Neighbourhoods;

(b)          note the outcome of the targeted engagement activities and acknowledge the risks that arose from implementing the East Oxford Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in advance of other strategic transport measures.

Signed………………………………………

Leader of the Council

Date of signing……………………………..