Notes from meeting of Environment and Economy Scrutiny Committee

OCC County Hall. September 19th 2007

Call in of decision of Transport Decisions Committee to :

 

(a)    approve the single route corridor indicated on the plan BNP1080/B3901 for the development of a replacement bridge over the River Thames; and

(b)    authorise the Head of Transport in consultation with the Head of Property to enter into negotiations with the landowner’s agent Cluttons to purchase the section of land within the sale document referred to as Lot 6

 

This decision was “called-in” by the County Liberal democrat Group for the following reasons:

 

  • inadequate local consultation with local residents, many of whom oppose the decision
  • lack of consideration of the traffic consequences on surrounding villages, particularly from HGVs; and
  • consequent noise and disturbance

 

Presentations

Chris Naylor on behalf of Standlake – all options not considered. Consultation non-existent.. The decision on a new bridge not the point of this call-in. It was the process and lack of public consultation. What other options had been considered? Please defer decision

Michael Ryan on behalf of Northmoor Bridge in parish of Northmoor . Parish NEVER consulted.

Brenda Smith on behalf of the Ward. OCC approach to HGV’s on A415 totally inconsistent. Although in1996 bridge was reported as weak, nothing done until 2006. In 2004 it was proposed to  discourage HGVs from using A415. In 2007 all restrictions are to be removed. No consultation with villages has taken place. Please defer decision.

Questions to officers from committee members.

1.      Why wait so long for weight limit? Ans: Barge hit bridge

2.      Can bridge be strengthened? Ans:No good methods available for Gothic arches.

3.      Is this an improper use of public money? Ans: No

4.      Was barge the cause of further deterioration or did the collision just draw attention to it? Ans:Probably the latter. Deterioration in both the under and above water areas of bridge. This has been caused by ALL vehicles, not just the HGVs.

5.      What about English Heritage’s stipulation of a bridge at least 1 kilometre upstream? Ans: This will never happen. We can’t wait that long. A need for a bridge has to be demonstrated

6.      Other bridges in Oxford have been strengthened. Why not this one? Ans: No suitable acceptable method.

7.      Steve Howell said,” the new bridge will have a marked environmental impact but the traffic must get through. Alternatives are not viable. Parishes were consulted  on new bridge.

8.      Has decision to replace the bridge on this new site already been made? Ans:No. It will need planning permission so all options and consultations can take place at this stage- including consultations with English Heritage

9.      This decision will affect not just the bridge but all the villages on the A415. Already failure to fund the Marcham bypass had prevented the upgrading of this road. What effect will a new bridge have? Ans. A415 had effectively been downgraded by the weight limit on Newbridge. Implication – the new bridge will simply restore the status quo.

10.  On consultation, how many times had the parishes of Standlake and Northmoor been consulted about replacement bridge Ans; Officers failed to answer this question

11.  How often was bridge monitoring taking place? Ans: Every three days

12.  Why was no camera being used to monitor weight limit violations? Ans: Not a practical proposition

13.  Because HGVs needed to use the A415 the bridge must be built therefore the land purchase must go ahead and this proposal was agreed 6 votes to 3.

 

Footnote: After the meeting the chairman agreed that consultation procedures by officers had been poor and this comment was minuted.