Agenda item

The purpose of this report is to provide the Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee with requested background information to inform the review and discussion of the recent Cabinet decision to adopt the Oxfordshire Street Design Guide.  A copy of the Street Design guide can be found here on the County Council’s website.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)       consider the contents of the report and put relevant questions to the Cabinet Lead member, Director of Growth and Economy and supporting Officers;

(b)       decide if any further action is required;

(c)       consider areas for further development of the Oxfordshire Street Design Guide and other supporting policy developments.

The Committee had requested background information to inform the review and discussion of the recent Cabinet decision to adopt the Oxfordshire Street Design Guide.  Oxfordshire County Council aimed to enable Oxfordshire as a whole to become zero-carbon by 2050. The Design Guide presented how the Council could prioritise active and healthy travel through street design in new developments contributing to the Council’s carbon reduction ambitions. The Design Guide provided design standards for streets in new developments. Promoting high quality placemaking whilst achieving high quality infrastructure for walking, cycling and buses.

This guidance was also intended to support the development industry in the preparation and submission of development proposals through the provision of up to date and transparent guidance.  This should both de-risk and accelerate the preparation and determination of development proposals for developers and the County Council.

The Committee had attended several workshops with officers on the Street Design Guide.

The Cabinet Member for Travel & Development Strategy, Councillor Duncan Enright introduced the item.  He emphasised that although the Street Design Guide had been approved by Cabinet, that there was still an opportunity for input by Scrutiny as it was ‘a living document’ and was subject to constant monitoring and review and improvement.  The Local Transport and Connectivity Plan (LTCP) consultation was also happening in January 2022, including all member workshops, and that, together with other documents, would all be taken into account in the developing of the Oxfordshire Plan 2050.

Chanika Farmer then gave a presentation to the Committee (a copy of which is attached to the signed copy of the Minutes) which outlined the functions of the Street Design Guide and how it related to other guidance, together with areas for development following consultation with the Cabinet and Scrutiny Committee, including:

•           Connectivity to areas surrounding new developments,

•           Design of car-free / low car housing developments,

•           Changes in shopping habits; accommodating deliveries in new developments,

•           Junctions in new developments,

•           Build on feedback from users of the Street Design Guide including stakeholders, District Councils, internal officers, and developers.

Following discussion, the Committee made the following points:

·                Members wished to see the next version of the Street Design Guide taking a ‘Living Streets’ approach that streets should be for Community, for Children, for relaxing, for commercial, for socialising and being adaptable for other means and should connect to Public Health Strategy around Healthy Place Shaping.

·                In the current document, there was no section on Car Free Developments, which would help meet the Climate Targets set out LTCP.

·                The document should be helping the LTCP meet it aims.

·                There was no mention of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging in the document – would like to see a specification that EV charging will be in a parking space rather than on the pavement.

·                There was no specification in the document around no through traffic developments.

·                The School Streets specification did not meet the aims of the School Street Programme intentions.

·                Members questioned why the next version of the document was due for 2023 when it stated that it would be reviewed annually.

·                The Committee noted that there was no mention in the engagement section of the document of any future engagement with the Scrutiny Committee.

·                In relation to page 4 of the Street Design Guide, members expressed concern that the descriptive words used could be interpreted in different ways; there was a need for a clear narrative of what the Council’s interpretations were.

·                In relation to page 10, members felt that the language used seemed to imply that the Council would be swayed by external pressures and felt that the language should be changed or removed.

·                Members queried how many times the Council had objected to a planning application based on proposals for street design or highway times and how many times it had been turned down due to those objections.

·                There was no mention of 20 mph in the document.

·                Members felt that there should be better promotion of walking and cycling to school.

·                Paragraph 3.2 – some members felt that greater consideration should be given to School Drop off, although other members felt that all forms of transport needed to be taken into account.

·                Paragraph 3.4 – should include other plants with the capacity to absorb pollutants.

·                Paragraph 3.5  - there needed to be careful Electric Vehicle planning set out in the document about where vehicles were charged and how they were charged.

·                Paragraph 3.6 – consideration could be given to recycling such as Eddington in Cambridge; with communal shoots around the edge of the development including composting.

·                Street lighting should have Central Management Systems attached to it.

·                Greater consideration needs to be given to air pollution and car use.

·                There was a need to ensure that developments were not planned in isolation and that joined up infrastructure was given consideration for community cohesion.

·                All published adopted highway, which extended beyond streets, such as access side paths should be given consideration in the design of developments.

·                The lack of bus infrastructure should be added to the challenges set out in document.

·                Members queried who the stakeholders listed in the document were and asked to be sent a comprehensive list.

·                Members should be added to the list of engagement consultee groups.

·                Home delivery needed to be taken into account in the document.

·                There needed to be closer co-operation before the one voice was written and careful consideration needed to be given to wording used.

·                In relation to outdated parking standards, members queried what could be done now and what regulations needed to be kept under review to consider possible future changes.

·                Some members felt that car free spaces options should be set out in the guide, supported by good public transport links

·                Members felt that the repurchasing sections could be strengthened.

·                Members expressed concern over the enforceability of the design guide.

Councillor Enright agreed that elected councillors should be added to the consultees, but felt that councillors should take more of a champion role on consultation and help reach the right people in their local communities.  He agreed with the points around transitioning to zero carbon and electric vehicle charging considerations.  In relation to the difference between rural and urban, he didn’t feel that there was a difference, but in the LCTP they would be looking at mobility hubs as a way of boosting active and public transport in rural areas, which was very important because of the stress on the bus services.

The Committee thanked officers for their presentation and AGREED to submit the points above for consideration.