Agenda and minutes

Everyone was welcomed to the meeting and invited to introduce themselves.

Apologies were received from Cabinet Member for Place Councillor Helen Holland

To note any declarations of interest from councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declaration of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

There were no declarations of interest.

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record and receive updates regarding any actions.

The minutes of the 20^th September 2016 were agreed as a correct record.

With reference to the action sheet, it was confirmed that the Prince Street Bridge project management and cost was within the remit of Place Scrutiny Commission.  ACTION: The item would be added to the January work programme subject to officer availability.

With reference to the Megabus bus stop site, officers continued to explore all of the options and had confirmed that Bond Street stop would continue to be utilised until Christmas at the least.  It was suggested that a site behind Cabot Circus (opposite Future Inns) should be considered.  The item would continue to feature on the action sheet until resolved.

For information purposes only.

The information provided was noted.

To note any announcements from the Chair

The Chair requested an overview from the Service Director, Transport regarding the management of the Long Ashton Park and Ride site.  The Service Director, Transport confirmed that the Council were still in discussion with the landowner, the content of which was currently legally confidential at present.  A report would be provided to the Commission as soon as possible.  It was agreed that any report would be coordinated with the inquiry requested by Councillor Goulandris to avoid duplication.

ACTION: Report regarding the Long Ashton Park and Ride management to be provided when legally appropriate.

With reference to Residents Parking Schemes reviews it was confirmed that Councillor Bradshaw, Cabinet Member for Transport would be attending the next meeting on 17^th November.  A communication from Councillor Bradshaw to Councillors involved in the current reviews would set out the changes made including a free form box and extension of the first five reviews.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum.  The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.  Public Forum items should be emailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting.  For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5 pm on 11^th October 2016.

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting.  For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on 14^th October 2016.

The following statements were submitted as public forum and were noted:

PS01 Councillor Don Alexander – Real Time Information Boards

Officers confirmed that RTI suffered from patches of low mobile phone signal availability and it was hoped an officer would be able to provide further information.  ACTION: A further response would be sent to Councillor Alexander following the meeting.

PS02 David Redgewell – Transport Issues

The statement was noted.

To note the work programme.

The work programme was noted.

To consider and comment on the draft Business Plan 2017-18 sections for Place and Transport, including the draft financial and saving proposals contained within.

The Commission received a report and supplementary information outlining the draft Business Plan 2017/18 sections for Place, Transport and Homes, including the draft financial and saving proposals contained within.  During the ensuing discussions the following points were made:

Our Transport

1. Charge for advisory disabled bays and Keep Clear markings

a.      Members questioned if the approach was ‘one size fits all’ and if so what would happen with those in receipt of benefits? (ACTION: Question for response)

2. Remove funding for local traffic schemes currently devolved to Neighbourhood Partnerships

a.      The current allocation of £410k currently held in the capital corporate budget and devolved to Neighbourhood Partnerships for local traffic schemes could be withdrawn and reallocated to the highway budget centrally as part of the broader capital programme.  The saving did not necessarily equate to less spend on traffic schemes.  Future schemes would then be identified via objective criteria.  It was confirmed that only future years funding would be affected and Section 106 and CIL resources would be unaffected. 

b.      Councillors highlighted that importance of ensuring that local people continued to have their say as the proposals would disempower the local residents from influence and the link with Neighbourhoods would be lost. 

c.       Officers confirmed that decisions around ideas and options would remain with the use of the Traffic Choices website and engagement would still be expected to continue at a local level.

3. Remove Companion Concessionary Bus Passes and withdraw reimbursements to Community Transport operators for concessionary travel

a.      Members were concerned about the proposed discontinued provision for concessionary bus passes and knock on effect that would have for Community Transport, which was vital for connecting communities.

4. Reduction of subsidies for bus routes with low numbers of passengers

a.      Concern was raised regarding a reduction of spending by half and the knock on effects on many other sectors.  Members asked for clarification of how the level of reduction was chosen and what other options may be.  Also, whether officers would return following the consultation and before making any final decision.  (ACTION: Question for response)

b.      Officers confirmed that the process would be similar to the recent consultation on community bus services and other factors such as the financial market and current contracts would also affect the final decision.

5. Stop funding the Freight Consolidation Centre which is not profitable

a.      Councillors requested further information about past efforts to make the venture commercially successful, how the product had been marketed to the private sector and questioned the negotiation of an improved contract with an operator. (ACTION: Question for response)

b.      It was suggested that introducing planning conditions around last mile deliveries, permitting electric vehicles use of bus lanes or the implementation of a clean air zone would improve options for the FCC.

6. Reorganise how school crossings are patrolled

a.      Councillors highlighted the importance of working with schools regarding the proposals and any alternative methods for providing patrols for school crossings outside 80 school sites around Bristol. 

b.      Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To comment on and help to shape the development of the Bristol Public Transport Information Strategy.

The Scrutiny Commission received the report from the Service Director Transport and a powerpoint presentation which outlined elements of the Bristol’s Public Transport Information Strategy prior to consultation with stakeholders and a Cabinet decision in the New Year. 

In response to the presentation the following comments were made:

a.      Members were complimentary about the bus checker app although the trip checker app was sometimes slow where multiple feeds were involved.  Officers confirmed that it was hoped that the open market would take over when the current license ran out.

b.      Large Real Time Information displays would be helpful at surburban railway stations as well as a better location at Temple Meads Station for improved integration of rail and bus information.

c.       Information at bus stops was updated four times a year and there was a process in place.  However, due to the number of changes and the wealth of data as well as the late hour of the information involved in September, this had taken longer than usual.

d.      If bus stops were vandalised this should be reported.  Problem locations could be reconsidered and a bomb proof material utilised for shelters (although it was not suited to all shelters).  BCC owned most bus stops with a maintenance contract for their upkeep however, most of the cost of vandalised bus stops was borne by BCC.

e.      There would likely be a renegotiation of contracts in 2020 whereby the approach to advertising could be developed.  It was suggested that video screens used for adverts could be utilised for bus information.

f.        The lack of consultation time when services were altered or ceased was raised due to the commercial market where operators preferred to keep strategies and information secret as long as possible.

g.      It was confirmed that a bill was progressing through the House of Lords which would make it easier for franchises.  This would be particularly of interest going into a combined authority.

h.      In terms of making the consultation as meaningful as possible it was suggested that the bus checker app could be used for an online survey, as well as ‘in person’ consultation with bus users.  It was suggested that the model used to consult on Supported Bus Services could be utilised, including working with the Neighbourhood Partnership system.

RESOLUTION: The report was noted and comments provided to officers to help shape the development of the Bristol Public Transport Information Strategy.

To seek views on the place-related implications of adopting the Bristol Resilience Strategy in advance of the submission of the strategy to the 1 November Cabinet meeting.

The Commission received a report and powerpoint presentation from officers which sought views on the Place related implications of adopting the Bristol Resilience Strategy in advance of presentation to Cabinet on 1^st November 2016.

In response to the presentation the following points were made:

a.      There had been a rigorous process with support from consultants to identify the points highlighted.  Those ten points were to an extent already articulated with identified challenges and outcomes however more points could come to the fore and there was six months to feed in and integrate resilience into future plans.

b.      It was suggested that the measurement of success in 10 to 50 years time would not be easy to identify given the interface between articulating long term aspirations and short term political tensions.  Officers planned to allocate a resilience value to each action as information was developed.

c.       The focus on the future population by changing behaviour at a young age (such as through the provision of free public transport for example) was supported.

d.      There was available resource via the Rockafella Organisation with the challenge to hook into opportunities.  Value could be extracted from associated companies and organisations.

e.      It was suggested that future flood risk for example, could be managed via a two way flood barrage down river to keep the tide out and river water in order to make the river frontage more beautiful.  Such a project could add value to areas such as St Annes, St Phillips and the Avon Cut.

RESOLUTION: The report was noted with comments made provided to officers