Highways, Transport, Traffic & Parking Archives

Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs): February 2008

The residents parking scheme has been put on hold for the time being. The Cherwell Road shops and parts of Marsh Lane will get a parking scheme. The County Council are consulting with the business in the area for their views (see letter below). County Councillor Altaf-Khan is meeting with transport officers to find out more about the scheme and is hoping some of them will come to one of our meetings soon - will let you know as soon as we know. Residents of Ashlong Road have expressed their concern that their area will be used as a car park when the scheme is introduced. The Parish Council will pass on any concerns and issues to the County Council - please let us know what they are.


The County Council is responding to requests from a number of the businesses located on the Cherwell Drive Service Road (between Copse Lane and Marsh Lane) to introduce parking controls for the benefit of their customers. The purpose of this letter, which is being sent to each business and each flat above, is to seek your comments on the ideas set out below.

We are suggesting that parking on the north-east side (next to the businesses) should be limited to a maximum of 1-hour between 8am and 6.30 pm Monday to Saturday – this is the same restriction as Old Marston Road shops. However you might think that the maximum stay should be 2 hours or that the restriction should not apply on Saturdays.

On the opposite side we are suggesting that parking is limited to a maximum of 3 hours between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday – this is the same restriction as the top of Marston Road at the side of the filling station. However you might think that the maximum stay should be 2 hours or that the restriction should also apply on Saturdays.

At present, apart from short lengths of yellow line at each end of the service road the only formal control is a disabled parking bay where parking is restricted to 3-hours maximum stay. We are suggesting that this bay be removed as disabled blue badges holders will be able to park in any limited waiting bay without time limit. We would also introduce short lengths of double yellow lines where there are dropped kerbs to help those with mobility difficulties.

There is no proposal to introduce restrictions during evenings or on Sundays.

Attached you will find a short questionnaire which will enable us to gauge the strength of feeling about these options. You may have other alternatives to suggest which could be considered, and there is space for these to be noted.

We are keen to find a solution which if possible meets the wishes of all local businesses and residents. To achieve this we want to seek your views prior to making a definite proposal which will then be subject to formal advertisement and consultation, with any unresolved objections being reported to the Council’s Transport Decisions Committee.

October 2007

The Chairman and Clerk recently met with Oxfordshire County Council with regards to the introduction of Controlled Parking Zones in Old Marston. There was a public meeting 16th October which gave local residents to express their views - you can see a summary of the meeting here and a briefing for the meeting here.

There will be a wider consultation period during 2008 involving County Council and the contractors involved in the implementation. Any information will be placed in this website as soon as we receive it. We expect the scheme to implemented towards the end of 2008. If you would like more information please feel free to contact the clerk or chairman or the County Council.


First Parking Space: £40

Second Parking Space: £40

Third Parking Space: £80

Fourth Parking Space: £120

Further Links

Consultation in  Headington, Northway and South Marston

Paying for Parking Permits

Who to contact about parking permits in Oxfordshire

Parking Problems in 1980s - picture gallery

Letter from Highways Authority on CPZs

Controlled Parking Zones

Feasibility Work: Autumn 2007

Why CPZs?

• Part of transport strategy

Addressing Local Transport Plan Objectives by:

• Restricting commuter parking and thereby tackling congestion

• Also helping to improve air quality, make roads safer and improve the street environment.

How does a CPZ work?

• Parking allowed only in designated bays – other road space controlled by yellow line restrictions.

• Signs indicate restriction times (usually 24-hr or Mon-Fri 9am to 5pm).

• Permits required to park in most bays. No restrictions for blue badges.

• Some time-limited bays for non-permit holders.

• Permits available from OCC Parking Shop, in person or by post: £40 per vehicle per annum for first 2 vehicles  per household; 25 visitor permits per 6 months for anyone aged 17+ (1st 6 months free, 2nd 6 months £15 or free for over-70s).

Benefits for Residents

• Stops commuters occupying residential spaces during the day.

• Creates more space for visitors during the day.

• Helps improve conditions for pedestrians.

• Reduces car traffic in the zone.

• Makes it easier for emergency  services and delivery/collection vehicles to access properties.

Why We Are considering a CPZ for This Area?

• Pressure for commuter parking - from existing and planned employment in the area: e.g. expansion at the JR Hospital.

• Near to a main route into the city for car commuters (for some roads)

• Next to existing CPZs: likely overspill.

• Potential pressure from planned residential development in the area.

• Other existing problems for residents e.g. from school or local business parking.

Feasibility work

• Investigating the priority and timescale for development of potential CPZs.

• Reviewing issues to be addressed in developing each zone, including confirmation of zone boundaries.


1. Confirmation of zone boundaries.

2. Identification of specific issues to be addressed in each zone.

3. Costed/prioritised programme of CPZs to develop.

Survey Work

In early October we will be making detailed surveys of the proposed zones including:

• Physical constraints to establish available parking.

• Residential demand – very early morning parking – 4am to 6am

• Day-time/commuter parking.

Physical Constraints

• Bus routes and stops

• Carriageway and footway width

• Road space available

• Cycle routes and possible cycle parking

• Fire hydrants

• Dropped kerb accesses

• Pedestrian crossing points

• Junction sight lines

Other Factors to Consider

• Views of stakeholders - consultation

• Planned and possible future development – employment and residential

• Any existing Traffic Regulation Orders

• Impact of adjacent CPZs

• Road safety and accident data

• Businesses, schools, places of worship, etc. in the area

• Problems for pedestrians

Consultation Process

• Meetings with local county councillors (September)

• Meetings with councillors and local residents’ representatives (September/October)

• Local residents input their views and local information (October/November)

• Council feeds back feasibility findings and decisions to local councillors and residents’ representatives (January/February 08)

Outside the Scope of This Project:

• The CPZs are part of a programme of Local Transport Plan measures for Oxford. However, within the feasibility project for these areas we are not considering:

– Changes in traffic management

– Road closures

– Speed limits

– Traffic calming

– Home zones

– Maintenance issues

– Changes to permit charging

How  Residents Can Help

• The council will be carrying out detailed surveys to establish parking demand and available space.

• However, if residents’ representatives would like to give us information to supplement our own surveys, on the type and use of parking in the area, we will consider it as part of the feasibility work.

Other Consultation during Feasibility Work

We will also consult:

• Police

• Fire and Rescue Service

• Oxford City Refuse and Recycling

• Public transport providers

• Major local employers, e.g. hospitals, universities

• School travel representatives Decision making process

• Feasibility report finalised January 2008.

• Decision on programme order of  implementation and general scheme approach by Cabinet Member in January 2008.

• Outcome of feasibility study and decisions fed back to local councillors and residents’ representatives in January/February 2008.

Implementation of Any Proposed Cpzs Would Involve:

1. Detailed planning of bays, restrictions and signage.

2. Consultation on design with residents and other stakeholders.

3. Final, formal consultation on Traffic Regulation Orders with residents and stakeholders.

4. Decision on whether to implement, by council’s Transport Decisions Committee.

5. Signing and lining works.

6. Once CPZ in place, administration, enforcement (by Control Plus) and maintenance of signs and lines, funded from parking permit receipts.

7. Periodic reviews funded from permit receipts.


• We’re carrying out this consultation with resident’s association representatives to:

• Inform you of our work on reviewing CPZ feasibility.

• Get your input to the feasibility process.

• We would like comments and any information you may have, by end October, please.

Residents Parking - Meeting 16 October 2007 Briefing

Residents Parking is covered by Parliament legislation and, provided that the County Council abides by the rules there can be no successful appeal. It was tried in another ward but got nowhere.

The City CounciI's objective supported by the County Council is to free up City traffic to the benefit of the bus service, reducing commuting by car to the benefit of radial roads, and the reduction of pollution. It was stated that City roads are above the limits. The scheme is another part of the policy to have it City-wide. Any objection seeking to stop it in this area will not succeed.

The County Council has therefore embarked on the work to introduce it in this Parish plus Cherwell Drive shops. It is known that cars previously parked daily in areas now controlled are to be found in the Parish. The areas staged introduction of

a. Cherwell Drive shops

b. The area to the Cherwell Drive side of Oxford Road,

c. The Rippington and Arlington Drive estates and

d. The Conservation area from School Lane to the bypass.

Area a is the worst affected. Trade is suffering as a result where open parking will be permitted. The period for parking is the subject of consultation with the shopkeepers. 1, 2 or 3 hour periods are possible. That will make shopping easier.

The fear is that cars displaced will then seize on area b, and, if that is controlled, to area c.

The County therefore considers that areas b and c should have residents parking in common with most of the City. Residents with permits only, with familiar road markings. Permits will be £40 each for two cars per property and subject to space £80 for the third and £120 for the fourth. There will be 25 Visitors parking vouchers each which are free for six months, and extra books of 25 vouchers at 60p each. The control period is subject to negotiation: 9 - 5, 8 - 6.30 or 24 hours; for either the whole week, Monday - Saturday or Monday - Friday.

The County Council is willing to consider omitting area d. or applying an alternative scheme like the "Lakes" area where there are signs at the entrances to the estate indicating the period-of restriction without having dedicated parking areas.

L.M. Garner, Clerk, 29 September 2007

Letter from Principle Engineer Dealing with Residents’ Parking

17 December 2007

Controlled Parking Zone Feasibility Study

Thank you for your letter dated 1 November 2007 which provided feedback from the recent Parish Council which discussed the possible introduction of a Controlled Parking Zone in Old Marston.

I apologise for the delay in replying to you. This is because I was awaiting the results of the traffic survey analysis. I also carried out another site visit of the area to clarify certain issues.

The report is still being prepared and definite recommendations still have to be agreed with other Officers before presentation to the Cabinet Member for Transport Ian Hudspeth in early February 2008. He will then decide which schemes will form part of the programme and their priority within it.

However I think it is reasonably safe to say that the Old Marston area will not form a priority when considering promotion of future Controlled Parking Zones within Oxford. Given the evidence so far the most likely recommendations will be the promotion of local parking restrictions in your area.

An example of this would be addressing the issue of commuter parking outside the shops in Cherwell Drive by introducing some short term parking restrictions. Another would be the removal of commuter parking at the Rippington Drive / Oxford Road Service Road junction by promoting some No Waiting at Any Time restrictions.

If a Controlled Parking Zone were to be introduced then it would most likely be in the form of a Restricted Parking Zone similar that in The Lakes and Northway. However arterial routes would require conventional treatment. The most likely restriction times would be 9.00am to 5.00pm.

Oxfordshire County Council is a partner in Oxfordshire Highways

As yet no area for such a zone has yet been recommended and I suspect that even if it was, further survey work would need to be carried out to determine its exact extent. However its core would be the arterial routes through the zone where commuters park and ride on public transport.

Once the report has been completed such issues will become clearer. Regardless of the type and extent of any new proposed restrictions the Council would wish to promote, such restrictions these would be subject to a full consultation process which would include every resident affected.

You have raised specific queries regarding the workings of any proposed Controlled Parking Zone. Some of the replies given are hypothetical but already apply to many of the existing zones.

I have already mentioned the issue of commuter parking outside the Chen/veil Drive shops. If no Controlled Parking Zone is recommended or if it does not appear early in the programme, then I will recommend that short term parking places be promoted at this location early in the next financial year.

As indicated in the presentation to you, the Feasibility Study is focussed solely on parking issues and does not include traffic calming matters. However I will mention in the report that the speed of the traffic in the Cherwell Drive Service Road should be addressed a separate traffic management matter, as soon as possible.

Parking on the access between the property boundary and the highway has not been permitted in other Controlled Parking Zones where a No Waiting at Any Time restriction exists in the carriageway. However this has been the cause of objections by other residents in other zones and is currently under review.

Any disabled blue badge holder can apply for a Disabled Persons Parking Place free of charge. However any space allotted can be used by any blue badge holder and would not be for the exclusive use of the applicant.

Medical staff is issued with a Medical Carers Permit and therefore would not require a visitor's permit. Non medical carers would either need to use visitors' permits or if long term care is involved, long term visitors permits are available.

Tradesmen's vehicles could either use nearby short term parking places or visitor permits. If residents require ongoing work such as building maintenance then the tradesman concerned will need to apply for a tradesmen's permit at £15 per week.

Unfortunately the resident in Beechey Avenue would not be allowed to park his caravan in any of the Two Hour Shared Use or Permit Holder Only parking places. This is because it is not classed as a permitted vehicle.

According to the County Councils records Southcroft is a highway maintainable at public expense. However I confirm that the caravan sites off Butts Lane and Park way are private roads. Other private roads identified as such are Bradlands, Butts Lane (part), and Cannons Field, Cumberledge Close, Lodge Close (part), Marsh Lane (part), Park Way, Rimmer Close and White Hart.

Unless the owners of these roads can be identified and permission given to the County Council to introduce waiting restrictions within them, then these roads would be omitted from the scheme. It should be noted that such roads would be far enough away from the bus routes into Oxford to act as a deterrent to commuters wishing to park on street.

Any City Council vehicles parked within the zone would require a valid permit. Unless these vehicles were parked off street, such vehicles would be most unlikely to fulfil the necessary criteria for such permits.

As yet no decision has been made regarding the types of controls that would be introduced in Raymund Road. The Council would liaise directly with the Primary and Secondary Schools in this respect. Some form of control has already been identified in the School Travel Plan to mitigate pavement parking by parents, as well as complimentary measures in Arlington Drive to encourage walking and cycling.

Every resident who drives a permitted vehicle registered in their name would be eligible to receive a Parking Permit for it. However no permits would be issued for works vehicles unless it was their sole means of transport and conformed to the size and weight requirements (i.e. less than 5 metres long, 2 metres wide, 2 metres high and less than 2.25 tonnes in weight.) Furthermore only one permit can only be issued to each resident. A resident cannot have two permits.

Any such scheme in Marsh Lane would affect anyone who currently parks on the grass verge. It is unlikely that any parking place will be created along the road itself as it is an arterial route. As mentioned before the issue of parking on access crossings is under review.

If the current situation remains the same then unfortunately Marsh Lane residents would have to park in side streets or in their own front gardens. As you are now aware this road as well as Ashlong Road are probably the most difficult areas within a proposed new CPZ that would need to be resolved.

Funerals in mid week would be catered for some short term parking in the vicinity of St Nicholas Church.

Please be aware that these sorts of issues are normally dealt with at the detailed designed stage rather than at the feasibility stage. However they should give you some idea of the approach the County Council may take in considering the restrictions within any proposed -   new Controlled Parking Zone.

Yours sincerely

Richard Kingshott, Principal Engineer, Controlled Parking Zones

Summary of Open Meeting Hosted by Old Marston Parish Council Regarding Proposed Controlled Parking Zones in Old Marston held on 16 March 2007

The purpose of this meeting is to present details of the proposed introduction of Controlled Parking Zones in Old Marston and for residents to express their opinions on the scheme. These views will be presented to the County Council to enable them to make a more informed decision when implemmenting the scheme. The next stage will involve consultations with the contractors in early 2008 who will be evaluating and inplementing the scheme. All residents can be involved in the consultation with the contractor. The scheme is due to be implemented late 2008.

The clerk informed the meeting that further enquiries should be directed to Richard Kingshot at Oxfordshire County Council, who is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Controlled Parking Zones.

Surveyors from the County Council will surveying the roads around the parish to evaluate the levels of parking and road use, starting at 04:00hrs and taking measurements every two hours.

In addition to the residents' parking will be the allocation of permits for visitors' parking. Residents will receive 25 visitor parking permits for six months. The first six months will be free then it will cost £15 for the following six months. Residents over the age of 70 years will have free parking permits. The scheme only applies to parking on the road and not to residents parked within their front boundary. Having a permit to park in the street does not guarantee a parking bay and in some areas there may be less parking bays than permits, which has the potential to sour relationships with neighbours. Residents will need to prove that they are residents and have a vehicle. Residents without cars are still entitled to visitors permits.

Several options are being proposed. One suggestion is simply having notices at the ends of roads stating that it is a residents' only parking area. A similar scheme has been employed in the area known as the lakes (Eden Drive, Ambleside Drive, Bowness Avenue, Conniston Avenue, Derwent Avenue and Snowdon Mead). Designated bays and yellow lines on roads is another option, although some residents were not happy about having numerous yellow lines painted over the roads. The Scheme will be enforced by Control Plus working on behalf of the County Council.

One resident wanted to know if there will be concessions for the disabled or for health visitors on official business. The Clerk and Chairman will look into this.

In Marsh Lane parking is not allowed on the grass verges but it happens. The police have admitted that they have no-one to enforce the parking restrictions. Some residents wondered if the scheme would be enforced.

A number of residents asked if they would have a parking bay outside their house or if there would be enough parking bays for all of the residents. The general consensus is that there was no guarantee that there would be enough parking for all those with permits.

The options available are: Monday to Sunday, Monday to Saturday, Monday to Friday, 24 hours per day, 09:00hrs to 17:00hrs or 08:00hrs to 18:30hrs. A vote was taken on the options and the most popular option was Monday to Friday from 09:00hrs to 17:00hrs. Visitors tend to arrive in the evening or at the weekend and this would extend the cost or the permits if the time restrictions were longer.

Someone asked how Arlington Drive and Raymund Road near the school would be affected.

Some of the roads in the parish are private and will not be covered by the scheme. Some residents expressed concern that once the controlled parking comes into effect then the unwanted traffic will move into the private roads. They would like to know support they would receive.

It was felt that the cost of the scheme would rise in subsequent years. A number of residents said that the parking scheme would have a very limited benefit and was simply a means of making money by the County Council. One suggestion made was to give residents free parking and to charge the offenders. The City Council have their agenda: reducing car journeys and improving the environment. The effect of this is that a number of residents are likely to knock down their walls and to pave over their front gardens to accommodate their vehicles. This will raise issues of planning permission.

One resident asked what the situation was for commercial vehicles and residents running a business from home. Someone asked if council employees who parked council vehicles outside their properties would be subject to the same restrictions and charges as other residents. The Clerk and the Chairman will look into this.

When the meeting was asked, no-one admitted to wanting the scheme but felt that it was inevitable.

The By-Pass

The Marsh Lane Fly-Over or By-Pass has been with us since the 1960s and we tend to take it for granted. Before it was built there was a huge campaign in view of the number of accidents caused by people trying to get from one side to the other,  particularly by people who needed to get from Elsfield into Oxford via Marston. Below are a few newspaper articles that appeared on the subject:

NORTHERN BY-PASS FLY-OVER PLAN - Oxford Mail 13th Febuary 1958

This drawing of the planned fly-over bridge across the Northern By-pass is seen looking towards Headington with the road to Elsfield on the left hand and the road to Marston and East Oxford on the right. The drawing is by Mr. Frank Coxon, of the County Surveyor's Department


A FLY-OVER bridge to eliminate the danger spot at the junctions of the Northern- By­pass with the Marston and Elsfield roads is planned by the Highways Committee of Ox­fordshire County Council. If the scheme is approved by the Ministry of Transport, the bridge will run on the line of Marsh Lane, with the object, of closing the Mill Lane junction and the Marston—Elsfield stag­gered access to the by-pass. In this way all traffic crossing the by-pass will use the bridge above it. The scheme follows concern expressed by Marston Parish Council at the dangers at the Mill Lane junction and at the Marston turn, where serious accidents have occurred. There should no longer be any need to turn right across the by-pass. The plan will also provide a by-pass to Old Mar­ston village.

Early plan for Marston fly-over

Concern Over By-Pass Death Roll (Oxford Times 12th February 1965)

Oxford City Council was on Tuesday criticised for being keener on getting the Marston Ferry link road built than it is on seeing the completion of the dual carriage-way for the Northern By-pass. Members of the monthly meeting of Marston Parish Council said if the City Council showed as much enthusiasm for the completion of the scheme for the by-pass as it did for the link road it would serve the interests of public safety. Mrs B. Deam said that it was the Parish Council that was ‘shouting the loudest’ about the notorious by-pass. The City Council seemed apathetic in the matter. The stretch of the road where most of the fatal accidents happened was within Marston parish, she said.

“It seems we’re back to where we started in our efforts to stop the slaughter on this terrible road,” she said. “We have got nowhere. And people are going to be killed. When the by-pass was first built, it was alright. But the increase in traffic has made it a death-trap.”

Controlled Overtaking

Mr. A. L. Pollard said he doubted whether any short stretch of a road in the country could have a worse accident rate. He suggested the Parish Council write to the Minister for Transport deploring his refusal to grant their request for a system of controlled overtaking on the by-pass. Nothing would be done, believed Mr Pollard, “unless we do sufficient jogging.” It was decided after Mrs Deam had suggested that a petition be drawn up to postpone any further action until a reply had been received from the Minister to the Parish Council’s request for an early completion to the dual carriage-way.

24 KILLED IN 10 YEARS: Questions in the Lords (Oxford Times 19th February 1965)

Lord Lindgren, Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, told Lord Segal in the Lords yesterday that during the ten-year period ending December 31, 1964, 126 people were seri­ously injured and 24 were killed in accidents on the Oxford Northern By-pass. This was below the national average. Asked what he meant by the national average, the Minister said  it was a three-lane road, visibility   was   good   and   accident rate as such was not high.   But where accidents did happen    they     were     usually head-on collisions and fatalities were high.   Recently there had been  two   accidents   in  which five  people were killed. The Minister considered that the road should be brought up to dual carriageway standards as quickly as possible. Work would begin as soon as the necessary acquisitions and con- tracts had been made and the road should be available to traffic early in 1969.


Lost Cause

Lord Segal said, " I cannot thank the Minister for the nature of this reply. Is he aware that this Oxford by-pass is regarded locally as yet an- other lost cause? Isn't it a pity that this senseless slaughter is now to be allowed to continue for at least another four or five years." Lord Lindgren said all accidents were to be regretted and the were regretted most tragically by those directly associated with the victims, but in planning road improvement – and there was a vast number of roads which have to be improved – there had to be a programme. The Minister had accepted the urgency of this one and the were going ahead as quickly as they could with land acquisition, contracts and so on. The Divisional Road Engineer was having discussions with the local authorities to make sure that the improvements could be made. Lord Segal said that he realised that things were apt to move very slowly in Oxford, but would not the Minister urge a higher priority for the completion of the road? Lord Lindgren said that everyone agreed that a road should be provided. But when it came to the acquisition of land and property, the persons concerned thought that the road should go thought someone else’s land and property. Lord Segal then suggested that there was already land available for the completion of the by-pass. Lord Lindgren said some landowners have been most co-operative but others were difficult, and it was because of these difficulties that the Minister and the department were considering whether or not work on this road could be carried out in sections, thus avoiding delays over acquisitions.

White Lines

But taking a contract of a million pounds like this in sections meant that the contractor could not carry out the work successfully and it added to the cost. Lord Segal proposed that the white lines on the road should be altered to prevent overtaking and he also suggested that there was room by the hedgerows either side to make a dual carriage way without further acquisition. Lord Lindgren said altering the white lines was one of the suggestions now under discussion with the City and the County.

Links to Other History Pages

History and Timeline of Marston; Geography of Old Marston; Archive News and Links; Maps; Street Names - the origin and meaning behind the names of Marston’s streets; St Nicholas Parish Church; Marston School History; History of Parish Council, Old Marston Charities Trust History; Old Marston Library Archives; Highways, Transport, Traffic and Parking; Medieval Marston; 1500s in Old Marston; 1600s in Old Marston; 1700s in Old Marston; 1800s in Old Marston; 1900s in Old Marston; Bell Ringers; Mill Lane Allotments; Mortimer Hall History; Planning and Development Archives; Other History Links.

Up (parent)