County Council’s position statement on energy pipe project

We are publishing the Chief Legal Officer’s email dated 29/12 in full. It explains why the County Council believes it has undertaken its role (limited to granting permission) lawfully but it is not ‘legal advice’ as such. Those wishing to explore the possibility of taking legal action will need to seek their own independent advice.

  • I am not aware of all the communication that has (or has not) taken place.  Clearly officers considered they should have done more and you have received an apology.  I am not sure I can add much to that.  I believe the County did urge the Trust to undertake consultation as they are the key players in this Scheme.  Fundamentally, the County’s role is to ensure they have permission to undertake work on the Highway – not unlike many applications for permission the Council receives…
  • In terms of Vital Energi – acting for the Trust – they have not claimed statutory powers to undertake works to the Highway – such as, say, a mainstream utility company.  The route for those who are not a statutory undertaker is to seek permission to undertake work from the Highway Authority.  Vital Energi are a licensee, not a statutory undertaker.  Having said that, it is a condition of the licence that they abide by the provisions of the New Roads and Street Works Act.
  • Licence applications were originally applied for in January 2014 but these were not granted although detailed discussions did take place about the work Vital Energi wanted to undertake.  That resulted, finally, in further applications being made on the 28 October 2015 and granted on the 21 December 2015 – I can confirm that the works would be classed a ‘major works’ for the purposes of the NRSWA.
  • Ordinarily a licence holder is required to give 3 months’ notice from the date when the licence is applied for, not from when it is granted.  The County agreed start dates within that 3 month period, mainly due to the proximity of other scheduled works and to start earlier was considered to be the least disruptive option.
  • As to the Executive Arrangements Regulations, the granting of a licence is a function delegated to officers.  It would not be a key decision because the County’s Constitution and the relevant Regulations define a ‘key decision’ as one which is likely to (a) involve the County in significant expenditure (which this does not) or (b): ‘to be significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in an area comprising two or more electoral divisions in the County’
  • As will be clear, a licence has been granted on each individual street, not for the whole Scheme.  I am not aware (although have not checked in detail) that these would involve two electoral divisions.  However, even if they did, the term ‘significant’ is defined as 25% of the people living or working in the area.  I do not believe that that threshold has been met.  As such, the grant of the licences would not be a key decision which requires an Cabinet/Executive decision.
  • In terms of the subsoil, that is really a question for the Trust.  The County’s principal concern is with the Highway fabric and as much subsoil as is needed to keep the Highway intact.  The ownership of the subsoil and notification that may need to be made to the owners of that is, as I say, a matter for the Trust undertaking the work.
  • I would not profess to know the detail of the City’s planning powers, but certainly the County’s role is restricted to granting permission under the New Roads and Street Works Act to those who wish to install apparatus  in the Highway or break open the highway for this purpose.  Accepting that communications can always be improved, I believe we have carried out that function appropriately and lawfully.  I note you are seeking your own advice on the planning issue.
  • In terms of the parking issue I can confirm this has been actively considered and the County has agreed that affected residents may apply for Visitors Permits to park in adjoining streets, outside of their designated Controlled Parking Zone.  The issue of funding of that has yet to be addressed as between the County and the Trust, but that does not affect the right of residents to apply.

Details re the visitors’ parking permits follow in the next email.

We have asked for further details regarding the “proximity of other scheduled works” which was referred to above, so that we can understand why the period of notice of less than 3 months for major works was considered to be the least disruptive option – we are expecting a further email on this later in the week.

We have also queried the dates on the temporary traffic order notices issued on 29/12/15 – there is a discrepancy between dates displayed in notices on street and those on the TTRO for All Saints Road, and the end date for the Sandfield Road works is currently listed on the TTRO as Tuesday 22 April – it’s likely that this should read Friday 22 April but we are asking for clarification.

 

Energy pipe update

Ruth attended a liaison meeting arranged by the Trust on 22 December along with some local residents, the Trust, a representative from OXTRAG (transport and access matters for the disabled) and the contractors.

Some matters are becoming clearer. Letters from the contractors to residents in affected areas two weeks in advance of the works will show a map of where the works will be, will specify the house numbers affected, will indicate the date when works will be happening, and will indicate where alternative parking might be found. There will be collection points either end of the works where those with mobility issues can alight or be picked up by car. Footpaths will be accessible throughout the works and there is a process for emergency vehicles to gain access to properties at all times. The contractors are aware of the need to retain access to Latimer Grange, McMaster House, St. Luke’s and The Brambles and have made a specific plan for the Latimer Road phase.

Some elements of the project are not so clear, and we have been in daily contact with City and County Council officers and others for further information on the following:

  • Has process been followed correctly?
  • Does this sort of scheme definitely not need planning permission?
  • Does this sort of scheme require lengthier consultation?

In the meantime there are further unanswered questions:

Parking

It appears that the Trust and the contractors are doing as much as they can to identify alternative parking spaces for those in affected roads either on private or Trust land. A temporary replacement car park may be set up on the area of grass at one corner of the JR’s site off Sandfield Road near Cuckoo Lane for use by those displaced from Sandfield Road and Latimer Road, this is being investigated but couldn’t be operational till February at the earliest. They are also talking to pubs and the universities about making additional parking space available.

There is a further option being explored that may mean that residents who have to park elsewhere may be given visitor permits; funding for this is as yet unclear and it would be done via the Parking Shop in Speedwell Street.

Insurance

Anyone who will have to temporarily park their car on-street, as opposed to off street, may be in breach of their insurance contract in the unlikely event that the vehicle should sustain damage. Advice is that owners should ring their insurance companies and let them know they will be parking on-street for a temporary period – it is possible that some insurance companies might charge for this temporary change to the contract and others won’t but it’s better to be safe than sorry.

Further action

We are awaiting legal advice from both Councils. We would encourage the submission of planning applications if at all possible; while it is likely that such applications would get permission, this would provide an opportunity for residents to give their comments and enable planning officers to ensure that tight conditions are placed on the works on issues important to local people, including:

  • alternative parking
  • disabled access
  • communication with residents and councillors
  • traffic management
  • start and finish times for working
  • construction access plan

The County’s view is that the need for planning permission is overridden by the section 50 licence which has apparently been obtained by the Trust and the contractor, but we have asked for clarification on this.

The next liaison group meeting will take place during the second week of January. Our next Focus leaflet will be produced w/b 11 January and delivered during the weekend of 16/17 January by our volunteers, but we shall try and update you on the blog in between. Our next Ward Focus meeting will take place on Tuesday 26 January from 6:00-7:30pm, venue to be arranged.

 

 

 

Temporary Traffic Orders for energy pipe works

Here is the wording of the TTRO:

OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

ROAD TRAFFIC REGULATION ACT 1984

Section 14(1) & (7)

Notice of Temporary Traffic Order Oxford, Various Roads Headington Temporary Traffic Prohibitions

Date of Order: 29 December 2015 Comes into force: 4 January 2016

This Order is being introduced because of works to install ducting for a hot water steam system, communications and high voltage electricity for a joint hospitals energy link – which is anticipated to take variously until the end of June 2016 to complete. The effect of the Order, when appropriate traffic signs are displayed is to temporarily prohibit parking/waiting and to close to traffic various sections of road and junctions as follows, and the works to progress as shown below:

Closures                                           Dates             Diversion

All Saints Road Between Latimer Road andStapleton RoadLatimer Road from

All Saints Road for approximately 15 metres north-westward

Stapleton Road from

All Saints Road for approximately 15 Metres

 Monday 4 to Sunday 17 January To access Stapleton Road:All Saint Road, Lime Walk, Old Road and vice versaTo access Latimer Road:

All Saints Road, Lime Walk, A420 London Road and vice versa

To access All Saints Road (West):

All Saints Road, Lime Walk, Old Road. Bickerton Road and vice versa
Stapleton Road – Entire length progressively in stages north to south between All Saints Road and Old Road Monday 11 January to Tuesday 15 March All Saints Road, Lime Walk, Old Road, Bickerton Road  and vice versa
Latimer Road – Phase 1.Between A420 London Road and Latimer GrangePhase 2. Between Latimer Grange and All Saints Road Monday 21 March to Thursday 30 June A420 London Road, Lime Walk, All Saints Road and vice versa for both Phases
Sandfield Road –North to south in three phases: Phase 1. Between Woodlands Road and Beech Road Monday 1 February to Tuesday 22 April Sandfield Road, A420 London Road, Headley Way, Woodlands Road and vice versa
Phase 2. Between Beech Road and the southeast property line of No.1 Sandfield RoadPhase 3. Between the Southeast property line of No 1 Sandfield Road and the junction withA420 London Road As above when appropriate traffic signs are use A420 London Road, Headley Way, Woodlands Road, Sandfield Road and vice versa.

 

All Resident Permit Parking, Shared Parking, Disabled Parking and other Restricted Time Parking Bays at the following locations on both sides of the road and footway will be suspended when shown by appropriate traffic signs and cones. As the works progress parking bays will be made available.

Parking Prohibitions                                                         Dates

All Saints Road – Between Latimer Road and Stapleton RoadLatimer Road – from All Saints Road for approximately 15 metresStapleton Road – from All Saints Road for approximately 15 Metres

 

 Monday 4 to Sunday 17 January 2016
Stapleton Road – Entire length progressively in stages north to south betweenAll Saints Road and Old Road Monday 11 January to Tuesday 15 March 2016
Latimer Road – Phase 1.Between A420 London Road and Latimer GrangePhase 2. Between Latimer Grange and

All Saints Road

 Monday 21 March to Thursday 30 June 2016
Sandfield Road – Progressively north to southPhase 1. Woodlands Road to Beech Road Monday 1 February to Tuesday 22 April 2016
Phase 2. Between Beech Road and the southeast property line of No.1 Sandfield RoadPhase 3. Between the southeast property line of No.1 Sandfield Road and junction with A420 London Road As above when appropriate traffic signs are use

Exemptions are included for emergency services, the works and essential access.

This Order will remain in force for a maximum period of 18 months or until the works have been completed whichever is the sooner.

The relevant parts of the following Traffic Regulation Orders (as amended) will be temporarily suspended as required for the duration of the works: The Oxfordshire County Council (Headington West) (Controlled Parking Zone) Order 2000;The Oxfordshire County Council (Headington Central) (Controlled Parking Zone and Various Restrictions) Order 2005;The Oxfordshire County Council (Disabled Persons Parking Places – Oxford) Order 2010.

Traffic Regulations Team (Ref. ACP/T3091/T3092/T3093/T3094) for the Director for Environment & Economy, Speedwell House, Oxford OX1 1NE. 0845 310 1111.

There are maps of the road closure areas in .pdf form, please click on the required link to view and please credit Headington Lib Dems if you will use this information in any social media message

001 All Saints Road Part 1 002 All Saints Road Part 2 007 Latimer Road Part 1 008 Latimer Road Part 1 019 Stapleton Road Sandfield Rd Part 1 (2) Sandfield Rd part 2 (2) Sandfield Rd part 3

 

Public meeting about the hospitals’ energy project

PUBLIC MEETING

Wednesday 9 December

7:00-9:00 pm

All Saints Church House, New High Street, OX3 7AL

​Works are due to start on trench digging in residential roads from 4th January but there has been an embargo on communications until the press launch earlier this week.​

We know our residents are worried because they don’t know what’s going to happen or when, and there will be a number of road closures during which no through traffic will be allowed, although footpaths will still be accessible.

We are pleased to say that reps from both the hospitals’ trust and the contractors have agreed to come along and answer questions from the public, so it should be a very lively meeting

The Trust has published answers to our residents’ list of questions on their website

We are sorry there hasn’t been much notice of this meeting but we want to hold it as soon as possible given the levels of anxiety shown at last week’s Ward Focus meeting

 

Reaction to hospital energy project briefing

All three Headington councillors attended the briefing today and asked questions about the project.

Fibre optic cables and high voltage cables will be laid within the trench containing the energy pipes.

Roads will be closed at either end while works are being carried out, however footpaths will remain open. The timetable for road closures has been discussed with Oxfordshire County Council and are as follows:

All Saints Road 4/1/16-27/1/16

Stapleton Road 11/1/16-15/3/16

Old Road 23/2/16-13/4/16 (part: controlled by traffic lights)

Sandfield Road 1/2/16-22/4/16

London Road 9/3/16-14/4/16 (part: controlled by traffic lights)

Latimer Road 21/3/16-30/6/16

When complete road closures take place, roads will be closed from either end with no through traffic.

We gave your 20 questions (see earlier post) to the Trust’s Director of Planning and Information and he has undertaken to post the answers up on the website as Frequently Asked Questions

We are trying to arrange a public meeting at All Saints Church House, New High Street on Wednesday 9 December from 7:00-9:00pm and will confirm this shortly. The Trust and Vital Energi (the contractor) have been invited to this meeting which is being arranged with assistance from Highfield Residents’ Association and have expressed interest in attending

We remain concerned that road closures are so long, and that several main routes will be closed at the same time. We are also concerned that Access to Headington roadworks may coincide with the energy project works. At this time we have no information about alternative arrangements for parking for affected residents and there are many questions still unanswered. We note that the Trust has apologised for the lateness of its communications – we believe that much of the anxiety by residents could have been minimised if consultation had happened months ago when the road markings were first apparent.

 

Hospital Energy Project media briefing

Here is the media message distributed by the OUH NHS Foundation Trust today. Please see our later post for comments.

Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has today announced details of The Hospital Energy Project, an 18-month £14.8 million project to upgrade the heating and hot water systems that supply the John Radcliffe and Churchill hospitals.

The project, called The Hospital Energy Project, is critical to ensure that energy systems at both hospitals are flexible enough to meet future growing demands for heating and hot water as hospital patient numbers increase, while facilities expand and improve. When fully completed, the new system will deliver a 45% reduction in annual energy costs and a 38% reduction in annual carbon emissions.

 

The new energy systems will offer both hospitals better resilience and less reliance on the national power grid in the high demand months of winter, as well as reduce carbon emissions from both sites with the ability to meet future environmental compliances. The Energy project will reduce future disruption to patient care and services.

Contractors, Vital Energi, who are extremely experienced at the installation of these types of systems including district heating through The Energy Link. Please do email any questions on this aspect of the installation or regarding the project, please email hospitalenergyproject@ouh.nhs.uk

Members of the public can also see details of the Hospitals Energy Project on our website www.ouh.nhs.uk or drop by one of the displays at either the JR or Churchill Hospitals until October 2016. For updates, please follow us on twitter @ouh_estates #ouhenergy

Twenty questions for the energy pipe press launch tomorrow

Here is our latest list of questions sent in by residents

Timescale

  1. What are the working hours? Will it include weekend working? On what dates will be the work be in my area?
  2. If work starts at either end simultaneously, will Old Rd and London Rd be affected at the same time? Will whole roads be closed either end?

How does it work?

  1. Can they explain the technology? How much carbon reduction do they intend to achieve?at what cost? and cost/ ton? What is the benchmark above which it becomes unaffordable? if the planners are considering all aspects of carbon reduction then consideration should also be given to the manufacture of the steel tubing, (China?) fittings, and insulation plus the cost of storage and transport to site, storage, reloading onto vehicles to the various sections of the site during the installation. The fuel used in excavation vehicles, back filling and testing plus the non green effect of the traffic congestion that will occur throughout Headington throughout the contract period.
  2. How large will the trench be and what about all the other cables, drains, sewage. Size of pipes too
  3. Is it steam or water? If it leaks under high pressure, would this damage road and paths?

Extent of the disruption

  1. How will noise and dust be controlled?
  2. Will pedestrian access along streets be affected?
  3. How will highways and footpaths be kept clean?
  4. Can we see the detailed construction plan?
  5. Can we have our pavements and footpaths resurfaced following the work? What quid pro quo can we obtain for all the disturbance?
  6. Protection of trees? In Stapleton Road for example the line is very close to the kerb so difficult to see how trees can be protected?
  7. What are the arrangements for emergency vehicles?
  8. Will refuse collections operate as normal?

Parking

  1. What arrangements for parking for contractors’ vehicles?
  2. What alternative car parking arrangements will be made for residents who may be unable to park near their house/in their drives while the work is in their street?

Communications strategy

16 Why hold a press launch – there could only be 4 or 5 press outfits interested, and why not have arranged to meet community groups already?

17 Have commercial and institutional organisations been informed? e.g. Taxi companies, delivery vehicles to/from main shops e.g. Blanchfords,  Online grocery providers, Mace on  ORC, Brookes, particularly re arrival at start of Semester 2 (NB  at Ward Focus  it transpired that Manager of Stagecoach  was not aware )

18 Have the emergency services even been informed?

Consultation with residents

19 Can we have a liaison group comprising residents reps, councillors and the contractors to meet regularly throughout the project do deal with residents issues and various construction contingences? This worked well during the Brookes JHB project.

Enforcement

20 Who will enforce the agreed working arrangements? What are the statutory controls – as opposed to the contractual conditions?

Latest on Stansfeld Outdoor Education Centre

County Councillor Roz Smith writes:

I've had confirmation from Birmingham City Council this morning that the
successful bid, subject to contract, for the 250 year lease of the Stansfeld
Outdoor Education Centre, Quarry Road was from The Oxford Trust.  The two
unsuccessful bidders, Oxford Co-Housing Group and a care home provider had been
advised too.
This afternoon I met with Steve Burgess, the chief executive at The Oxford
Trust, on behalf of the Friends of Stansfeld group.   Steve explained the
trust's vision for the site which includes an innovation centre for start-up
companies and entrepreneurs working in science and technology, a new education
centre, plus an on-site cafe and a 100 seat theatre venue for use by visitors
to the new Wood Centre for Science & Innovation.  They have posted a press
release with more details and I am sure this news will be in the local media
shortly.
On a personal note, I am pleased that the site will continue to be used for
educational purposes and that the Oxford Trust is looking to enhance the
facilities and to have managed public access and that the wood land area will
be respected. However, I was surprised that the Oxford City Council has not
required at least some homes to be built on the brownfield area.

Projects in Headington – recycling and energy

At our next meeting City Council speakers will tell us about the controversial new recycling initiative and we’ll have an update on a major new green energy project linking the JR and Churchill hospitals.

Please put the date in your diary

Tuesday 27 October

6:00 – 7:30 pm

Headington Ward Focus Meeting

Manor Hospital Conference Room, Beech Road 

If you would like to contact your Lib Dem city councillors for advice on any issue please contact

Lib Dem County Group statement on potential closure of children’s centres

Oxfordshire’s 44 Children’s Centres provide a wide range of services to children and families. They are highly valued by all those who access them as places offering support and advice on the challenges of bringing up children from infancy to adulthood. 

The Tory administration’s proposals to reduce the number of Centres from 44 to 7 or 8 “hubs” will remove entirely the universal provision currently provided. In spite of the administration’s assertion that “there has been cross party agreement” on the issue, Liberal Democrats opposed the last OCC Tory budget on the grounds that the savings planned (particularly the proposed £6m of savings from the Children’s Centre Budget of £16m) was highly damaging to the social provision of the County Council and unacceptable. Nothing has changed in the last year except the threat from Central Government of yet more savings in the coming year. Liberal Democrats accept the need for savings, but believe that they could be found by some amalgamation and sharing of management, whilst keeping the pressure on Central Government to understand that there is no further room for major cuts in OCC Social care provision without cutting proven frontline valued services. Liberal Democrats also believe that such wholesale cutting is storing up untold social and financial costs for the future.  

As well as cutting most of the Centres themselves, the Tories propose to cut staff at the Children’s Centres by more than 50%. The redundancy costs involved will mean that very few savings will be delivered in early years. Furthermore, “Sure Start” money (given to Councils years ago to set up Children’s Centres may well have to be repaid. This again will limit any savings which the Tory proposals might generate.

The Tories propose to focus the little money left on “the most vulnerable” communities. A very large number of other families, currently accessing and benefiting from the Children’s Centres will get no service at all. There is every likelihood that some of those will quickly move into “the most vulnerable” category increasing future cost provision.

The Tory proposals are shortsighted, desperate  and will not work – even in financial terms.

In order to make all possible savings, Liberal Democrats are arguing that the Council’s effort and energy would be much better spent researching, consulting and persuading the District Councils, the Parish Councils, Schools and the Children’s centres themselves to find ways of running the Centres leaving the County Council to provide the Social care expertise. This would generate more immediate and long lasting savings.