Agenda and draft minutes

Area Committee 4 - Thursday, 28th July, 2022 6.30 pm

Venue: A Committee Room - City Hall, College Green, Bristol, BS1 5TR. View directions

Contact: Amy Rodwell 

No. Item


Apologies for Absence pdf icon PDF 406 KB


The Chair welcomed those present and noted apologies from Councillor Jude English, Councillor Yassin Mohamud and Councillor Farah Hussain.


Approval of minutes from previous meeting pdf icon PDF 461 KB


RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the previous Meeting held on 18th November 2021 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.



Declarations of Interest


There were no declarations of interest made.


Public Forum pdf icon PDF 551 KB

Members of the public may make a written statement ask a question or present a petition to most meetings. Your statement or question will be sent to the Committee and be available in the meeting room one hour before the meeting. Please submit it to or Democratic Services Section, City Hall, College Green, Bristol BS1 5UY. The following requirements apply:

. The statement is received no later than 12.00 noon on the working day before the meeting (27 July 2022) and is about a matter which is the responsibility of the committee concerned.

. The question is received no later than three clear working days before the meeting (22 July 2022).


Members noted the two Public Forum Questions and one Statement that had been received from Rob Bryher in respect of Seymore Road Community Parklet and published on the Councils website.



Community Resources Manager Update and Decision pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Additional documents:


The Community Resources Manager presented the report and drew attention to the following:


Replacement Tree Planting


a.      The Committee was asked to note that the cost of replacement tree planting had been increased from the 2013 rate of £765.21 to £1,041.66.


b.      Tree Bristol confirmed that the unit cost of replacement tree planting had been held for the last nine years, but this costing could no longer be maintained, due to rising costs, and the relevant Retail Price Index increase to tree replacement had been applied.


Ombudsman Complaint


c.       The Committee noted that a complaint to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman by a Bristol resident regarding transparency around funding criteria and decision-making processes had been upheld in part.


d.      The Council agreed to ensure that the reasons for rejecting outline proposals at stage one meetings were clearly recorded and published on the Council’s website.


CIL and Section 106 Monies available to Area Committee 4 at 30th June 2022


e.      There was an overall sum of £800,139.72 available to Area Committee 4, which breaks down as follows:


·       General AC4 expenditure: £147,775.14 going up to circa £400k

·       Old Market Neighbourhood Plan expenditure: £652,364.58

·       Section 106 available: a total of £331,477.94 uncommitted Section 106 agreement monies, of which £163,203.52 is designated specifically for tree planting and tree replacement. 


f.        It was noted that there were two time-limited S106 were at risk if not allocated and that both contributions had planting sites proposed in the Tree Proposal.


Outstanding Full Proposals from November 2021 AC meeting


Architecture Centre Temple for Everyone scheme:

g.       Members considered the uncertainty surrounding the Temple for Everyone Scheme and gave weight to the reservations expressed by Parks and Transport Officers and


RESOLVED: not to progress to a Full Proposal from the Architecture Centre Temple for Everyone scheme.


St George Central – Soundwell Road Safety Scheme:

h.      Members noted the complexities of the scheme and that a permanent solution to the road safety issues could not be resolved without further funding.  Members agreed that it would be difficult to decide on this without consideration of all of the other proposals submitted.


In discussion the following points were raised:


i.        Most wards had a priority proposal to bring forward.


j.        There was a need to consider construction inflation as the original allocated budgets and contingencies may not go as far as previously understood.  A revised technical projection was needed from officers to understand potential changes to delivery timescales within the current allocated budgets.


ACTION: Officers to provide guidance on the impact of construction inflation on the cost and delivery of approved projects.


k.       It would be important to focus on areas of deprivation and which proposals would have the greatest impact on areas with the most need.


l.        More accountability was required to understand the reasons for the delay in delivering approved projects.  ACTION: Officers to provide reasons for delays in delivery of approved projects.


Officers were asked to obtain answers to the following raised:


m.    Whether inflation was applied  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.