Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting.

There were no apologies for absence.

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.

No interests were declared.

Approval deferred until the next meeting.

To note any announcements from the Chair

The Chair, Councillor Gollop, advised that detailed proposals for the Clean Air Zone would be available once the Government had responded to the Council’s  Outline Business Case.  An OSMB meeting would be arranged at the appropriate juncture, likely to be spring 2020. 

The Chair noted that the High Streets Inquiry Day took place on the 28^th January 2020.  The following points were made;

·         The Inquiry Day was positive and a good example of how Scrutiny could work effectively to shape policy; the challenge  was how we turned the information into a productive  plan;

• There were good quality  presentations, including from the Institute of Place management who provided a clear steer on 25 indicators of success;

·         The support of the Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and City Design at the Inquiry Day was welcomed and Members looked forward to working with the Executive to effect change.

·         Relationships with communities were key for success and Members would ensure this aspect was addressed in their recommendations to Cabinet;

·         The Management Board thanked all those involved in the planning and delivery of the Inquiry Day.

The Chair noted that the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Evidence Day would be held on the 3^rd February 2020.   Councillor Hiscott, Chair of the People Scrutiny Commission and Chair of the SEND Evidence Day, made the following points:

·         The Evidence Day would be preceded by an Extraordinary Meeting of the People Scrutiny Commission, with a focus on SEND.  The public had been invited to make Public Forum submissions; it was planned that the meeting would be webcast;

·         The Evidence Day would hear from a range of witnesses, including parents and carers, national policy specialists, and education practitioners;

·         There had been positive cross-party development and the aim was to utilise the Scrutiny function to assist in the development of the Written Statement of Action and improvement of the EHCP process.

The Chair noted that Cllr O’Rourke, Chair of Growth & Regeneration Scrutiny Commission, wished to make a submission to Cabinet about the Temple Island, under the standing item ‘Reports from Scrutiny Commissions.’  It was noted that usually statements of this nature would need approval from the appropriate  Scrutiny Commission in advance although due to time constraints relating to this item a revision to the usual procedure would be required.

RESOLVED;

That the Chair’s business be noted

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 Friday 24^th January 20.

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 Wednesday 29^th January 20.

The following public forum was received and a copy placed in the minute book;

Statements and Petitions

P1: Avon Crane & Commercial Repairs Ltd – Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S1: Ian Tomlinson, Managing Director, Chaunceys Timber Flooring – Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S2: David Heinrich, LW Jenkins Ltd - Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S3: Stuart Hignell, Bristol Gas Supplies Ltd - Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S4: Jim Martin, Director, Lifting Gear & Safety Ltd - Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S5: Frank Porcaro, Autochoice - Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

S6: Chris Tomlinson, Managing Director, Chaunceys Timber Flooring - Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

In response to the points made during public forum statements, officers confirmed that the Council was looking into the concerns raised regarding the impact of the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) on local businesses. 

Questions

Q1 and Q2 - Suzanne Audrey, Vice-Chair of Totterdown Residents Environmental & Social Action (TRESA) – Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

The following replies were given to supplementary questions from Suzanne Audrey:

Supplementary question 1:  Can an officer clarify what the 100m corridor is, as it doesn’t seem very far? 

Answer: The 100m corridor refers to the areas surrounding the CAZ.  The Council will ensure the impact of the CAZ in those areas will be included in the modelling although the wider impact on other parts of the city will also be reviewed.

Supplementary question 2:  Our (community) Group has submitted queries about the CAZ, and we have not been approached. Would someone from the Council come to one of our meetings?

Answer: Yes, we would like to meet and engage with the Group.

Q3 - Q9: Cllr Eleanor Combley – Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

The following replies were given to supplementary questions from Cllr Combley:

Supplementary question (reference Q3):  Why is there focus on pollution from Euro 6 petrol cars, when the primary concern should be about older (pre-Euro 4) petrol cars?

Answer:  Euro 6 diesel emissions are often much worse in reality than official test data suggests.

Supplementary question (reference Q9): How should Councillors’ flag issues and concerns from residents living close to the edge of the scheme area?

Answer: Councillors are encouraged to report all concerns via the Councillor Enquiries email address.

Q10 – 11: Cllr Eleanor Combley – Agenda item 8, One City

Q12: Cllr Martin Fodor – Agenda item 7, Clean Air Zone

The following replies were given to supplementary questions from Cllr Fodor:

Supplementary question 1:  I am concerned about streets becoming rat runs by those wishing to avoid the CAZ.  Will you consider including more roads in the CAZ?

Answer: Please submit any areas of concern and we will ensure the issues are fully explored.

Supplementary question 2: Should the Clean Air Zone boundaries be revised? 

Answer: We are reviewing the CAZ boundaries prior to submission of the Full Business Case.

Q13: Alan Morris, Bristol Clean Air Alliance – Agenda item 7, Clean Air  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Members were provided with a presentation from the Head of Strategic City Transport. During the ensuing discussion the following points were made;

·         The CAZ charge would apply once a day; the number of journey times would not make a difference; 

·         Options were still being appraised and the Council would be engaging with businesses about the best solutions;

·          The CAZ intended  to encourage people to change their behaviours;

·         There was no data to provide comparisons with other cities at this stage - every city would be different and the Council’s  main requirement was to design a scheme that worked locally;

·         It was acknowledged that changing vehicles could lead to a cost implication for local businesses; the Council would focus support where needed, which included bids to government for additional funding;

·         There was a discussion about the Cabot Circus proposal. The Chair noted that Members had differing views about the merits of excluding the shopping centre car park from the CAZ. The delay in the Government response to the Council’s Outline Business Case may affect the Council’s ability to achieve the original compliance date;

·         The impact of idling trains on emissions would be included in the modelled baseline numbers.  The Mayor stated that he would raise train idling with Network Rail;

·         The Council was working with a range of partners (eg First Bus, the Universities and Hospitals) to seek the best outcomes;

·         Some patients, due to their conditions, would need to drive to city centre hospitals and so a range of solutions were being explored including  exemptions using number-plate recognition;

·         There was a need to include ensure any  mitigation measure and concessions into the  full business case where possible in order to gain funding, but the list could be added to as or when new situations or issues emerged.  These could be brought back to scrutiny in due course;

·         Cars idling outside schools was a known issue; public awareness could help remedy this.

·         The Chair noted that Members were overall  positive about the implementation of the CAZ but urged that the concerns raised about be addressed as a priority.

RESOLVED;

That the queries and comments raised be addressed as part of the Clean Air Zone Full Business Case, which would be considered by Scrutiny before decision at Cabinet. 

There was a 5 minute break at 6.50pm

Members were provided with a presentation from the Head of City Office as requested by Members. During the ensuing discussion the following points were made;

·         Members noted the One City Plan Annual report was the second iteration.

·         There was a discussion about representation at the One City gathering, with Members suggesting that the event should be more representative of the city, and that Councillors should be included if possible.

·         Information relating to the One City Boards was available on the One City website.  Most of the Boards were either open to the public or published their reports and minutes.

·         There was ongoing exploration regarding funding opportunities to support the One City priorities by seeking contributions from partners.  These could include officer support, as well as financial;

·         Last year’s One City priorities were discussed and it was confirmed that there would be continuing focus on street conflict, which was also a Police & Crime Commissioner priority.  Period Friendly Bristol would carry on in its own right as a charity; there would also be a continued focus on affordable child care;

·         The £86K European Capital of Innovation prize funding would be allocated to the work programme streams (presented on the slides);

·         The criteria for success of each One City project is being established and will include developing ‘SMART’ targets for each goal.  The Universities may help with tracking progress.

The update was noted.

Not available at the time of publication.

The minutes were noted.

To note the work programme.

The Work Programme was noted.