Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

There were none.

To note any declarations of interest from the 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 declarations 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 none.

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record.

A Member noted that in the minutes of the previous meeting, officers had advised that they were working with WECA to further fund Liveable Neighbourhoods in Bristol and asked if any of the £10 million City Regional Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS) Fund from WECA would be allocated to the scheme. The Director of Economy of Place advised that the CRSTS funding was not yet confirmed by WECA, but they were expecting to hear back in April 2023 and once known, the team would then be able to start planning the allocation for Bristol. It was noted that the commission would potentially hold an inquiry day in the coming months on Liveable Neighbourhoods where funding options could be discussed.

Resolved; That the minutes of the previous meeting be approved as a correct record.

It was noted that there was a delay in getting a response to the outstanding actions from the previous meeting on 16^th November 2021 and Members urged that actions be followed up sooner in future.

Members raised the action regarding the Q1 Performance Report around obtaining specific figures relating to BCP434 - ‘Reduce the proportion of deaths attributed to particulate air pollution’. The Strategic Intelligence & Performance Advisor confirmed that the data for this performance indicator came from Public Health England and more information on this metric could be found within the follow up information sent to commission Members on 16th February.

To note any announcements from the Chair

There was no Chair’s Business.

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 scrutiny@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 Tuesday 22^nd February.

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 12.00pm on Friday 25^th February.

The following Public Forum questions and statements were received, and detail can be found here.

Public Forum Questions:

Public Forum Statements:

Kathe Jacob was in attendance and asked the following supplementary question. In the officer’s response to question 1 it stated that closure of Mina Road, North of the roundabout was considered but strong local opposition to this proposal meant it was not taken forward. Kathe asked for more information on what constitutes as strong opposition and what the opposition was on this occasion. The Director of Economy of Place advised that this would be raised with the appropriate officer for a written response after the meeting.

Kathe urged officers to reconsider the decision made to not issue an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) for Mina Road.

Suzanne Audrey was in attendance and presented a statement regarding planning applications and freedom of information requests.

Resolved; That Public Forum be noted.

To note the work programme.

The Work Programme was noted.

The Strategic Performance & Intelligence Advisor introduced the report and highlighted key areas.

There was some confusion around the data for BPC433 – ‘Reduce the total CO2 emissions in Bristol City (k tonnes)’ but Members were advised that this information was not yet updated for 2020 due to a time lag as the information was provided by DEFRA. A Member asked if there would be a review on way ways to improve this. The Strategic Performance & Intelligence Advisor noted that Performance reporting was being reviewed with the intention to add more narrative in future and that a ‘how to read performance reports’ guide would be published on the council’s website and circulated to all commissions in due course.

Action: Strategic Intelligence & Performance Advisor to provide commission Members with ‘how to read performance reports’ guide when available.

A Member asked what impact cuts to bus services would have on future quarter targets and were advised that bus travel was out of the council’s control as it is privately owned so therefore were not sure what impact it would have on future targets.

There were some concerns around delays in processing planning applications and expectations around communication. Members asked what the service is doing to prioritise applications and if there was a good level of communication around delays. The Executive Director advised that this was a national issue, and all major cities were experiencing delays; Covid-19 also had an impact. Officers noted that they would like to look at all schemes but there was a focus on larger schemes.

A Member asked how the data for indicator DGRC476 - ‘Increase the number of people travelling actively to work by walking and cycling’ related to the pedestrianisation of streets as mentioned in the management notes section of the report. The Executive Director advised that this was a new measure, but more information could be provided after the meeting.

Action: Officers to provide Members with information around indicator DGRC476 – ‘Increase the number of people travelling actively to work by walking and cycling’ and how it was related to the pedestrianisation of streets.

The Risk & Insurance Officer introduced the report and highlighted key areas.

It was noted that a mistake had been made in the papers regarding the number of deteriorating and closed risks. The Risk & Insurance Officer confirmed that there were in fact 0 deteriorating risks and 0 closed risks.

Members asked why the risk rating for CRR27 had remained constant despite the metric regarding the number of additional units of temporary accommodation increasing since the previous quarter from 930-960 units. It was advised that this question would be referred to the appropriate officer for a response after the meeting.

Action: Officers to provide further information on why the number of additional units of temporary accommodation had increased since the previous quarter from 930-960 units despite the risk rating remaining constant.

Members noted that the tolerance risk rating for CRR23 - Failure to deliver enough affordable homes to meet the City’s needs, had risen from 12 to 15 since the last quarter and asked for more information as to why this had changed. Members were advised that

this question would be referred to the appropriate officer for a response after the meeting.

Action: Officers to provide further information on reasons for the change in tolerance risk rating from 12 to 15 in Quarter 2.

Members asked why risk BCCC3 – Covid-19 was removed from the risk report for Q3 and were advised that that it had been decided the risk would be better managed in a different directorate.

The Director of Economy of Place introduced the report and shared a presentation on the Temple Quarter & St Phillips Marsh Engagement Programme.

A Member raised concerns around whether this programme would result in job losses in the area. The Executive Director for Growth & Regeneration advised that although the nature of work/jobs will change, the idea is not to remove employment from the area; An Employment Land Study would take place alongside this piece of work and the intention was to prioritise local people.

A Member noted that Bedminster Bridge Roundabout was dangerous for bike users and therefore would not use the route to access Mead Street. Officers recognised that modes of travel will need to change and confirmed that the proposals for the surrounding area would go out for consultation later in the year.

A Member asked if there would be catchment areas for the proposed new school and officers advised that the project was still in early stages so this hadn’t been decided yet but could engage with Scrutiny in due course.

A Member asked if there will be a bus interchange at the South entrance of Temple Meads and was advised that plans were still in the early stages, but the intention is to make the station accessible from all entrances however, the Northern entrance would be the main transport hub.

There was a conversation around land ownership in the area and Members were advised that the majority of the land in the area was privately owned but officers were hoping to influence the planning applications submitted.

Action: Officers to provide information on land ownership in the Temple Quarter & St Phillips Marsh area.

The Regeneration Manager introduced the report and shared a presentation on engagement for the Western Harbour vision.

Members raised concerns around the lack of information available to scrutinise as the report and presentation lacked detail. Extensive engagement was welcomed by Members, but they were expecting more detailed information on the engagement results and next steps for the project. Officers noted that the Western Harbour full engagement report would be published on the Harbour Hopes website on 10^th March 2022.

Action: Officers to provide confirmation once the Western Harbour full engagement report is published on the Harbour Hopes website.

Members were advised that the master planning stage would last 12-18 months starting in Autumn/Winter 2022 following the consideration of consultation results and agreeing a funding and procurement strategy which was anticipated to be brought to Cabinet in June 2022.

Members urged that the consultation questions allow more opportunity to add extra comments to ensure that the process is more meaningful as people will inevitably be in favour of the four principles outlined in the presentation. Also, noted that more detail around equalities and demographics would be useful.

Councillor Beech, the Cabinet Member for Climate, Ecology, Waste and Energy introduced the item, and the Project Director for Bristol Avon Flood Strategy shared a presentation on the strategy. It was advised there was still a significant funding gap, but work was taking place to secure the funds. Work is just starting on the Outline Business Case and it is anticipated that following that, a key decision would be taken in Autumn 2023 to progress to a full business case.

The Director of Economy of Place advised that this was a large regional project

which they were working in partnership with Environment Agency (EA) and neighbouring authorities to unlock key parts of the city for regeneration.

Officers noted there were currently risks of tidal floods so therefore, there were lots of properties at risk and there was a need for an adaptive and integrated strategy. The vision was said to be more than just flood walls and defences, but to include public realm enhancements and active travel routes. The flood defences would be constructed in 2 phases to ensure deliverability.

Phase 1 would be towards the latter end of 2020s. The strategic outline case was approved by Cabinet last year for £79M but there was still a £135M funding gap at present but, work was taking place with the EA and West of England Combined Authority (WECA) to secure the funding. Officers noted that the EA were seeking to gain confidence in the delivery of the strategy so they could approach future planning applications with confidence.

A Member asked about the funding gap and grants in the strategy approach and asked if it was possible to bring that forward to phase 1, also, how much was tied to stage 2. Officers advised that this was something they were exploring but it would involve the EA bringing froward that funding and if they were content, it would need to be agreed with other partners.

Members asked if the funding all needed to be identified by the local authorities and were advised that this was not the case; WECA were also working on this so would be looking to contribute as well as contributions from private sector organisations. Members were assured that all funding options were being explored.

Members asked how much of the house building programme was dependant on this strategy. Officers advised that up to 13,000 homes could be unlocked for potential development, some of those at the Temple Quarter site which was to be discussed later in the meeting.  

A Member asked officers about their confidence levels for the strategy and the Executive Director for Growth & Regeneration noted that failure was not an option; They would need to bridge the funding gap to ensure the EA were confident and that they would continue to work until that position is reached, which included passing the 5 tests as set out in the published papers.

Members asked to what extent did the delivery of this unlock the redevelopment of St Philips  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

The Director of Economy of Place gave a brief update on the status of the strategy and noted that the Principal Flood Risk Officer was unable to attend the meeting at short notice so may have to take questions away and respond to Members after the meeting.

A Member asked if Bristol City Council was working with the surrounding local authorities on cross border flooding issues. Officers recognised that this was a regional issue, and the Principal Flood Risk Officer meets with their counterparts at relevant local authorities regularly to discuss issues.

Members were keen to discuss the strategy further with the Principal Flood Risk Officer and requested further information on the Frome Catchment Innovation Project

Action: Flood Officers to deliver a Scrutiny Member briefing on the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy to potentially include (or separately) update on work around the Frome Catchment Innovation Project. Communities Scrutiny Members to be invited to attend discussions around the Frome Catchment Innovation project.

Members raised concerns around blocked drains causing flooding in some areas of the city, specifically drains in underpasses, and asked if there were any immediate plans to address this. Members noted that they had previously been advised that underpasses would be phased out and asked if routes would be at street level going forwards.

Action: Officers to provide information on plans for clearing blocked drains that were causing flooding in the city and the approach to underpasses going forwards.