The response from Headington Lib Dem councillors to the County’s proposals are now published.
Our response is in three parts:
Comments on the proposals: click on Headington Lib Dem councillors response to Access to Headington consultation 150807
Appendix giving additional comments received from residents: click on Appendix 150807
Comments on the consultation process: click on Headington Lib Dem councillors concerns re consultation process 150807
Here is the executive summary:
The Access to Headington consultation was not fit for purpose. There was little context or factual data to inform the decision-making of residents, many of whom were not made aware of the proposals until late in the day. (see separate document on the consultation)
We believe that these proposals do not achieve their objective to support health and well-being, and reduce transport’s environmental impact.
Transport congestion in Headington is most acute for approximately 4 hours a day, five days a week during term-times. These proposals will significantly affect Headington residents 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, all year round. Impact on residents is disproportionate.
The proposals focus on incoming commuter traffic from outside Headington, but do not take local context and local traffic needs of the whole community sufficiently into account.
We oppose the removal of an as yet unspecified number of trees and verges proposed by the County Council, (see general comments, section 3).
We believe that better alternative proposals for road layout and cycle improvements can be made that are more environmental sustainable, and list some ideas proposed by local residents (see projects).
We do not believe the current proposals for cycling improvements give sufficient priority for the safety of cyclists at junctions. We believe that, where possible, cycle routes should be segregated e.g. adjacent to Marston Road. If carriage width allows, we believe that mandatory cycle lanes should be accommodated, but not at the expense of the loss of trees (see general comments, section 6)
We oppose the proposals to remove on-street parking for reasons stated (see general comments, section 4).
We have concerns about the scheme’s impact on access to parking and/or frontages for disabled residents on Cherwell Drive, Headley Way and Windmill Road where existing on-street parking including disabled spaces could be removed, and this raises equalities concerns. (see section 1, area 2)
We believe that greater priority should be given to pedestrians in the next round of proposals. (general comments, section 5)
We believe these proposals will have little or no impact on modal shift by those who work in Headington.
We have sent these comments to County Cllrs Ian Hudspeth and David Nimmo-Smith, and to the County Transport Planning team.