Public addresses and questions received in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.10 and 11.11. The full text of any address or question must be received by the Head of Law and Governance by 5.00pm on Tuesday 18^th June 2013.

 

Full details of the addresses and questions submitted by the deadline will be provided separately prior to the meeting.

 

The following public addresses and questions that did not relate to matters for decision at the meeting were made and asked at Council.  All of the addresses are attached to the signed minutes of Council as Appendix II.  The questions and replies are set out below:

 

(1)         Mark Stone, Motor Neurone Disease Charter – Address

 

Following the address, the Leader proposed on behalf of Council that the Council should sign the Charter and support the five principles of it.  Council agreed the Leader’s proposal by general assent.

 

(2)         Fran Ryan – Community Led Homes in Oxford – Address

 

Following the address, Councillor Seamons said that although in terms of land it was unlikely the Council could help, he would be happy to convene a meeting to discuss the matters raised in the address.

 

(3)         William Clark – The Consultation Process – Address

 

Following the address, Councillor Rowley said that the matter of the swimming pool had undergone full consultation and had been fully debated by Council.  Council had decided that a new swimming pool be provided at Blackbird Leys.  That decision would not be changed.  It was for these reasons that he had chosen not to enter into a dialogue with members of the public.

 

(4)         Nigel Gibson – Openess and Transparency – Address

 

The following response (which had been circulated in advance) was given to the address:-

 

In July 2011 CEB delegated authority to the Executive Director Community Services, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer, to award a contract for the build of the new pool. That report recognised that legal challenges may mean that the contract would not "go live" for some time. After a procurement exercise was completed the contract was let in March 2012 to Willmott Dixon. Due to legal challenges and anticipating further delays that contract contained two conditions precedent relating to the dismissal or withdrawal of two legal challenges - the request for Judicial Review of the Council's decision making process by Nigel Gibson and the a request for Judicial Review by Mrs Zani of the County Council's decision to reject an application to have Blackbird Leys Park declared a Town Green.

 

On satisfaction of these two conditions precedent, the contract by definition became unconditional, and therefore active.

 

Mr Gibson applied for Judicial Review of the CEB’s July 2011 decision in regard to closing the Temple Cowley pool, but after twice failing to obtain consent from the Administrative Court, he finally discontinued his application in March 2013.

 

Mrs. Zani’s application to have the County’s decision judicially reviewed has now been withdrawn and therefore the County Council's decision not to register the land as a Town Green stands.

 

From the above it can be seen that the conditions precedent in the contract have been met, and as a consequence the contract is now active. There has been no material change in the relevant circumstances concerning the need for the facility or the Council's ability to pay for it, and preparations to commence on site are therefore now well advanced.

 

(5)                     Rowen Smith – Full Circle and Charity Mentors – Address

 

Following the address, Councillor Clack said that she would be happy to meet with the speaker.

 

(6)       Question to the Board Member for Leisure (Councillor Mike Rowley) from Andrew Brough (the questioner was not present at the meeting)

 

It is very important that children living in the vicinity of rivers and waterways are able to learn to swim and have proper swimming pool facilities near to where they live, to avoid the tragedies that have happened in recent years.  When there is only one pool in Blackbird Leys, instead of the existing two pools in Blackbird Leys and Temple Cowley, how will the Council make sure that children still have the same amount of time for learning to swim?

When Temple Cowley Pool was completely rebuilt in 1987, the Oxford Branch of the British sub-aqua club was unable to regain their training session slots on Wednesday and Friday evenings.  The existing Blackbird Leys Pool has many small group users.  Examples have included canoe safety training and aqua aerobics.  How will all these groups be accommodated when the two pools in Blackbird Leys and Temple Cowley are replaced by one in Blackbird Leys?

 

Reply

 

The new pool has a teaching pool, splash water and an eight lane 25m pool. The eight-lane pool also has a moveable floor that enables greatly improved programming for both swimming lessons and mobility water sessions. We have also continued to offer free swimming and targeted free swimming lessons to young people in the city.

 

 

 

 

(7)       Question to the Board Member for Leisure (Councillor Mike Rowley) from Sue Brough (the questioner was not present at the meeting)

 

Could you please give full details (dates, names of people present, points discussed, any outcomes or action points, etc.) of the public consultation meeting(s) which took place before the City Council decided to spend £9.2 million building one new 25m pool in Blackbird Leys, closing the two existing pools and selling off the Temple Cowley site; and has the decision been reviewed since the latest Census Data from 2011 became available?

 

Reply

 

While we would not provide names, the Council’s web pages contain the detailed consultation information.

 

 

(8)       Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Cathy Wheeler, Oxford Voice (the questioner was not present at the meeting)

 

I am increasingly concerned at how Oxford City Council is profiting from selling or donating land and retreating from providing services, particularly in East Oxford; this is bewildering to the hard-pressed Council Tax payers of Oxford.

 

 It is imperative for the open and transparent local authority democracy at Oxford City  to be able to effectively hold our elected councillors and the overly financially rewarded executive officers to account for their decisions, and that the governance structure is properly understood.

 

Can you please explain the legal and corporate status of Oxford City Council: for example, is Oxford City Council a for profit corporation?  If Oxford City Council is a corporation, what is the trading name, and what happens to the profits?  Is Oxford City Council a co-operative?  Is Oxford City Council a Public Limited Company?  Or is Oxford City Council a Company limited by shares?  If Oxford City Council has shareholders, who are these shareholders? 

 

Reply

 

Oxford City Council is a local authority with powers regulated by the various Local Government Acts. All financial and other monitoring information about the Council’s policies and services to the people of the City can be found on the Council’s website.

 

(9)       Question to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Price) from Sietske Boeles (the questioner was not present at the meeting)

 

Regarding the potential risk to public health and the environmentposed by the Castle Mill development, could the Leader confirm:-

 

(i)           that the Council has allowed this development to go ahead on land which it knew to be contaminated with highly toxic pollutants such as asbestos and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are linked to birth defects and cancer; and elevated levels of metals such as lead with are linked to brain abnormalities in children;

 

(ii)         that the Council’s environmental health officer identified in December 2012 that adjacent allotments may be at risk and requested further surveys to assess risk on surrounding sites;

 

(iii)    that surveys submitted recently on behalf of the developers have shown that groundwater is contaminated with PAHs, that these are well above safe levels, and that the Environment Agency has required further surveys.

 

In view of the above, what reassurances can the Leader offer the people of Oxford that this development has not posed, and does not continue to pose, a risk to public health and the environment ?  Specifically, can the Leader confirm:-

 

(i)           that no contaminants, including contaminated dust, has spread outside the development site;

 

(ii)         that it is safe for people to visit Cripley Meadow allotments, and consume the food produced there;

 

(iii)    that an assessment has been carried out to determine whether any damage has been caused, or is being caused by the development to Port Meadow, which is both a SAC and SSSI.

 

If the Leader cannot offer the above reassurances, will the Council issue an immediate stop notice or explain why it does not believe that this is necessary?

 

Reply

 

The Planning Committee imposed a condition as part of the planning permission for the development which required the developer to undertake tests and produce data and reports which would indicate whether any significant risk exists and what, if any, steps might be taken to address that risk. That condition has not yet been discharged.

 

Interim results were received and this led the Council, working in conjunction with Environment Agency (EA), to require a detailed quantitative risk assessment in accordance with model procedures. This has just been completed and the results are now being analysed by the EA and the Council.

 

There are no data or reports that demonstrate an unacceptable risk exists to public health on the allotments. Site investigations were carried out between 2008 and 2011 and levels of contaminants were below the threshold for determining the site as contaminated land. Precautionary advice was given to  allotment holders which included  washing hands before eating and washing/peeling vegetables grown on the site before consumption. This advice remains sound today.

 

No assessment has been made to determine whether any damage has been caused or is being caused by potential contamination on the land of the Castle Mill development. This is because such an assessment has not been requested by Natural England or the EA as the statutory consultees and because Port Meadow is separated from the development site by the allotments and the Castle Mill Stream.

 

(10)     Question to the Board Member for Leisure Services (Councillor Mike Rowley) from Jane Alexander

 

The Oxford City Council Summer 2013 ‘Your Oxford’ paper had a small article within it which headlined ‘Better Access to Leisure Facilities’. Does Oxford City Council accept this as an oxymoron because:-

 

(i)    You are actually closing two swimming pools and replacing them with one and removing a gym which is open from 6am until 10pm and replacing it with a gym that cannot be open to the general public in school hours;

 

(ii0   Individuals with the concessions membership scheme will be unable to use this facility;

 

(iii)  Without canvassing those who already regularly use the Temple Cowley pool and fitness centre it is unclear how many people will want to attend a school to use the gym, especially one that will be open for a much shorter period and that will be busy in terms of mechanical and pedestrian traffic at very particular times (excluding some morning use if it was offered) and that is in a poorly lit area at night.

 

And how will the Council either remedy this inaccurate article or actually improve in real terms access to leisure facilities inside the ring road in East Oxford, for example by keeping Temple Cowley Pools open?

 

Reply

 

The article is entirely accurate. The new pool is a City-wide facility and when it opens the east of Oxford will for the first time have a top-quality, modern, integrated leisure centre to compare with what North Oxford has in Ferry Leisure Centre.  The partnership with Oxford Spires Academy will help to ensure that Temple Cowley continues to have a good local leisure offer.

 

Our approach to leisure is detailed in the City’s leisure strategy, and it is a continuing success. Since 2006 the City has had the third highest increase in activity nationally with 27.8% of adults now doing at least 3 x 30 minute sessions of exercise each week.  This puts Oxford City Council in the top 20 Councils in England for leisure participation.

 

(11)     Question to the Board Member for City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Adrian Arbib

 

Re: Red line photo montages, dated December 21, 2011 and now available on the planning portal, regarding the Roger Dudman Way development.

 

Can the Board Member confirm that these photo montages, including the red line, were submitted by the developer and if so when?  And when were they made available to (a) the public and   (b) councillors?  Were they submitted with the wirelines?

 

There are 13 of them in total and presumably they were all loaded at the same time?  

 

Were these photo montages available to councillors when they determined the planning application in February 2012?  

 

Reply

 

The photographs including the’ red line’ plan or wireline were submitted by the Applicant, the University of Oxford.

The photographs from Port Meadow indicating the location of the development were received and uploaded to the website on 21st December 2011.  They were available to be viewed by the public and councillors from this date.

The red and white wirelines were mounted up on the website at a later date, on 8th February 2012, having been received a day or two earlier.
The planning committee met on 15th February 2012 and all these images were available to Councillors when they met.