At this meeting, the Cabinet Member approved parking schemes in Charlbury and the Hightown Road area of Banbury, a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in Littlemore North, Oxford, and changes to eligibility for parking permits within various CPZs in Oxford. A decision on two-way cycling in Sheep Street, Bicester was deferred pending an investigation into potential issues on Fridays due to the street market. A number of traffic schemes were also approved, including the conversion of a zebra crossing to a parallel crossing at A4144 Woodstock Road, Oxford, and 20mph speed limits in a number of Oxfordshire villages, as set out below.

Charlbury Parking Measures

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of parking controls in Charlbury, including the introduction of resident permit holder only parking areas, parking places with maximum stays and no waiting at any time restrictions on a number of streets. The report considered the statutory consultation on these proposals, which had a higher than expected response rate, indicating the level of local interest in the proposals. The most common concerns related to potential displaced parking, the need for more parking provision in Charlbury, the impact on local businesses and the practicality of enforcement.

In particular, there were concerns about the proposed residents' permit holder parking on The Playing Close. As the properties on The Playing Close have off-street parking, many consultees felt there was no need to introduce further restrictions.

It should be noted that traffic jams in Dyers Hill, Thames Street & Nine Acres Lane are caused mainly by the considerable number of large vehicles trying to pass each other because of the weight restriction on the bridge. These vehicles are banned but OCC never enforces this. Remove these vehicles and the jams would go and cars need not be banned from parking on these roads. ¹

Proposed Controlled Parking Zone - Hightown Road Area, Banbury

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of parking controls in the Hightown Road area of Banbury, including the introduction of permit holder only restrictions and 'No Waiting at Any Time' (double yellow lines) restrictions. The report considered the statutory consultation on the proposals and noted that the majority of responses were in support of some form of residents parking scheme being introduced in all roads where changes have been proposed. Objections focused on the cost of residents' permits, limits on visitor permits and the potential for social isolation. The new restrictions are intended to address problems with commuter parking and innappropriate parking, as described by one of the local councillors.

High Town road has become a potential death trap with the current parking situation. This is an accident waiting to happen.

The Cabinet Member also approved an amendment to the scheme to include properties from No. 2- 56 (evens) and No. 13-37 (odds) Hightown Road in the schedule of eligible properties for residents parking permits.

Proposed Controlled Parking Zone - Coopers Gate, Banbury

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of permit holder only parking restrictions between 8am and 6pm, Monday to Saturday on Coopers Gate in Banbury. The report noted that the majority of public responses to the consultation on the proposal were against it, with the respondents questioning the need for the scheme, raising concerns about increased traffic and a potential increase in accidents, and objecting to the cost of permits. Objections focused in particular on the removal of existing single yellow line parking restrictions, especially on the section of road between the A361 Southam Road and the first T-junction, due to the perceived impact on access and safety.

One resident, who has lived on Coopers Gate since it was built, objected, claiming that the new scheme would lead to parking chaos, obstruct emergency services, and encourage non-residents to park in the area.

Please do not let cars park in Coopers Gate it will cause chaos with the emergency services and encourage people who work in surrounding areas to park in Coopers Gate when they see other vehicles parked. We know what we are talking about we have lived here from the time of construction and the present system works well.

Proposed Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) - Littlemore North, Oxford

The Cabinet Member approved a Controlled Parking Zone in Littlemore North, Oxford, between 8am and 6:30pm, 7 days a week, with permit holders able to park without a time limit and non-permit holders limited to 2 hours. There was substantial opposition to this scheme, with 85% of the 372 respondents to the consultation on it objecting. The main reasons for this were the cost of permits, the lack of a perceived need for the scheme, the potential for increased social isolation, the belief that it is a revenue-raising measure, and the potential for displacement parking.

The majority of responses also objected to the related introduction of 'No Waiting at Any Time' (double yellow lines) parking restrictions, arguing that they would reduce the number of available parking spaces and that existing double yellow lines are not enforced.

Councillor Trish Elphinstone, the County Councillor for the Rose Hill & Littlemore division in which Littlemore North is located, also objected to the scheme, claiming that it was not needed, that it would impose costs on residents during a cost of living crisis, and that it would have a negative environmental impact by encouraging the paving over of front gardens.

"There is not enough evident support for the CPZ for Littlemore. In our survey Most residents report that there is no parking displacement issue, and it is not necessarily needed for the community. Cost-of-living situation is a major factor, and it is an unwanted expense. These are the reasons we asked for the consultation not to proceed. We support Littlemore residents’ view in not having a CPZ. Given this strength of opinion of residents in the consultation results, I ask that local views to be respected/represented in the decision-making process and for proposed CPZ not to go ahead in North Littlemore. In general, I support the proposed double yellow lines for safety and reduction of parking.”

CPZ Parking Permit Eligibility (Various Locations, Oxford)

The Cabinet Member approved a number of changes to parking permit eligibility rules in existing CPZs across Oxford. A number of properties were excluded from eligibility for resident's parking permits and residents' visitor parking permits. In addition, a number of other properties were excluded from eligibility for resident's parking permits only, allowing for the retention of residents' visitors parking permits. These changes were made following the development of properties for residential purposes and associated conditions within their planning permissions.

A decision on the eligibility for resident's parking permits and residents' visitors' parking permits for 6 Gouldland Gardens, in the Northway area of Oxford, was deferred pending the resolution of conveyancing issues.

Westbury Crescent Highway Improvements Scheme

The Cabinet Member approved a one-way traffic restriction, traffic calming measures and 'No Waiting at Any Time' (double yellow lines) restrictions on Westbury Crescent, Oxford, in order to address an imbalance in vehicle traffic flows and concerns with vehicle speed and safety, in part caused by the implementation of the Cowley Low Traffic Neighbourhood. The plans include the use of physical planters² to narrow the road.

There were a significant number of objections to the scheme on the grounds that it would increase journey times, cause safety hazards, and would not be effective.

It will turn two useful roads into more time wastage, which will add to the commute to work more than the LTN bollards already have. Why does the government persist on making things that work more difficult for the residents that live in these areas, specifically cowley area.

The Cabinet Member did not approve two planters outside 36 and 31 Westbury Crescent, or the related 'No Waiting at Any Time' restrictions.

Armstrong Road, Oxford - Proposed Waiting Restrictions

The Cabinet Member approved 'No Waiting at Any Time' (double yellow lines) restrictions and raised table traffic calming features on Armstrong Road, Oxford. These measures, which were agreed as part of a section 278 agreement³ for a residential development, were originally approved in 2020, but needed to be reconsulted on because the works were not completed within the two year window.

The new consultation attracted significant opposition, with 73% of respondents objecting. The most common reason given was that there is insufficient parking on the new development and so residents rely on parking on Armstrong Road.

The parking management ran by PCM Ltd is already confusing, badly managed and far too restrictive for local residents to get a permit. I'm frankly beyond frustrated about not being able to get additional parking permits for the property I rent in.

Proposed Puffin Crossing - A417 Reading Road, West Hendred

The Cabinet Member approved the installation of a Puffin Crossing on the A417 Reading Road, in West Hendred, approximately 30 metres east of its junction with The Greenway. The new crossing, which received strong support during its consultation, will provide a safe crossing point for school children catching the eastbound school bus and also for pedestrians wishing to cross between the different parts of the village. The Cabinet Member also approved Bus Stop Clearways on the north and south sides of the A417 in the vicinity of the Puffin Crossing.

The location of the bus stop for eastbound buses is being reviewed.

It should be noted that the current position of the bus stop for eastbound buses – marked/circled as ‘A’ in Annex 1 – is currently being reviewed taking account of a recommendation in the road safety audit report for the scheme, and it is possible that this will be relocated to the east side of the Puffin Crossing as marked/circled ‘B’.

Proposed Raised Table - Denchworth Road, Grove

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of a Raised Table traffic calming feature at the Denchworth Road/The Maples/Barley Way junction, in Grove. 64% of the respondents to the consultation on this proposal objected, arguing that a roundabout would be more effective, that the funding could be spent elsewhere, and that raised tables do not work.

If this is the same feature as the ones on Newlands Dve, they have no effect at all. Almost all modern cars, including my own, are wide enough to not require even a slight reduction in speed.

A44 Begbroke - Proposed 20mph and 40mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of a 40mph speed limit on the A44 at Begbroke, but did not approve proposed 20mph speed limits on village roads after the local parish council objected to them. The 40mph speed limit, which was supported by Begbroke Parish Council, is needed in order for the installation of a new Toucan Crossing.

The Parish council do not feel there is a need to reduce the limit to 20 mph. The new part of the village is not on any kind of rat runand the roads are mostly used by local residents who are respectful of the village and do not over speed

Cyclox objected to the 40mph speed limit, arguing that it should be 30mph.

Wheatley: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the proposed introduction of 20mph speed limits in Wheatley, despite objections from a number of consultees. Wheatley Parish Council were supportive of the proposals in general, but raised some concerns. They noted that London Road, which carries a lot of through traffic, appears to have good compliance with the existing 30mph speed limit and asked whether reducing it to 20mph might encourage some drivers to overtake. They also recommended extending the proposed 20mph speed limit on the Waterperry Road at the north end of the village and also from the roundabout on the London Road/A40 bridge to the existing 20mph speed limit by Wheatley Park School. They also queried the status of the 20mph speed limit on the High Street and noted an error in the consultation plans which omitted a 20mph section of London Road.

Oxford Bus Company also raised concerns that the 20mph speed limit would make their buses slower, less attractive and less relevant.

Asthall Leigh & Field Assarts: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Asthall, Asthall Leigh and Field Assarts, all of which are in Asthall Parish, following a consultation which received support from the parish council, the Oxfordshire Cycling Network and Thames Valley Police.

Hardwick with Yelford: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Hardwick and Yelford, which are in Hardwick with Yelford Parish.

Highmoor: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Highmoor. Highmoor Parish Council supported the proposals in general, but requested that the 20mph speed limit on the B481 at the north end of the village be extended further north in order to protect those using the Village Hall, and that a 30mph buffer zone be implemented at the bottom of Witheridge Hill.

Several residents, including one who lives on the B481, also requested that the 20mph speed limit be extended further north.

The positioning of the proposed transition points to 20 mph on the B481 is illogical. To the northern end, the transition point should be further north, preferably at the start of the village boundary and include a transition from national speed limit to 30mg and then to 20mph. To the south, there should be a phased transition from the national speed limit to 30mg further south before reaching the village and then to 20mph at the proposed point where there is a footpath crossing the road.

Kingston Bagpuize: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Kingston Bagpuize. Several consultees requested that the 20mph speed limit be extended to include Faringdon Road and the A415, which were not included in the proposals.

I write to commend the proposal to introduce 20mph speed limits in this village. Indeed, it is one of the last villages or towns in this area still without any such limit. However, I strongly suggest that the proposed scheme would be deficient in that it only addresses some of the residential side roads. Whilst these roads clearly deserve and public safety would benefit from the proposed 20mph limits, the scheme (if approved) would be the only one of its type in this area to exclude the main thoroughfare through the village (Faringdon Road).

Letcombe Regis: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Letcombe Regis. Letcombe Regis Parish Council were supportive of the proposals in general, but asked that the views of those living outside the 20mph area be considered, particularly in respect of the start of the limit on the lower road out of the village. Several residents requested that a section of Letcombe Road, which was proposed to remain at 30mph, be reduced to 20mph.

I support the introduction of the 20 mph speed limit in Letcombe Regis, however am disappointed by the decision to keep the rest of Letcombe Road at 30mph instead of reducing it to 20mph along with the rest of the village.

Nuffield: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Nuffield. Nuffield Parish Council were broadly supportive, but disappointed that the current 40mph speed limit on the A4130 would not be changed, noting that they were keen to have a crossing installed between the two bus stops on the road. They also confirmed that there was further residential support available for this following a 2023 survey.

Rotherfield Peppard: Proposed 20mph Speed Limits

The Cabinet Member approved the introduction of 20mph speed limits in Rotherfield Peppard.