Agenda and minutes

Councillor Douglas Nicol had sent his apologies to the Panel, Councillor Nathan Hartley was present as his substitute.

Councillor Brian Webber announced that he would be replacing Councillor Malcolm Hanney on the Panel following his resignation from the Council.

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

Sally Rothwell addressed the Panel on behalf of the Circus Area Residents' Association and Vineyards Residents' Association in relation to agenda item 13 (Parking Strategy). A copy of the statement can be found on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

‘The northern part of the Central Zone (the area north of Queen Square, George Street and Paragon), also known as Lower Lansdown, is predominantly residential in character. This is recognised in the 'Bath City-wide character appraisal', which is a Supplementary Planning Document and as such should inform Council decisions. There are a low proportion of business premises in Lower Lansdown (comparable to Zone 1).’

‘Residents in Lower Lansdown are unfairly treated compared with residents in the 'Outer Zones'. Although it is the most densely residential area in the city, there is almost no 'permit-holder only' parking. There are no resident visitor permits. In the Outer Zones there is a minimum of 50% permit-holder only places and residents can buy day permits for their visitors. The Central CPZ is now completely surrounded by the Outer Zones, where parking is very difficult for non-residents. Visitors head for Lower Lansdown and drive around looking for a space, adding to the congestion and pollution in the heart of the city. The result is close to 100% occupancy of parking bays in this area, while in the Outer Zones there are empty bays, with occupancy in some Zones as low as 8%. This places enormous pressure on residents of Lower Lansdown when they are trying to find a place to park in the area in which they live. (Many residents here, like most people, need to use a car more or less regularly).’

‘The current arrangements have developed without any overall strategy. When the Central CPZ was originally created in the 1970s the aim was to discourage parking in the centre. Parking was available on streets around the edge of the CPZ. This has now been completely reversed, so that the centre is almost the only place where visitors can park. Even here, on-street visitor parking is limited because 75% of the spaces are occupied by residents. There is still no published strategy and the draft parking strategy (as it stood earlier this year) completely failed to address the problems of central area residents. We do not see why this area should be singled out as the one place for visitors to city centre businesses to park. Visitors should be encouraged to use firstly the park-and-ride, and then off-street parking. If some on-street visitor parking is needed, the burden ought to be shared with the other residential areas surrounding the centre.

We ask the Panel to take note of the unfairness of the current arrangements for residents of our area, and to urge the Council to address the problem in its parking strategy.’

The Chairman thanked her for her statement.

Councillor Brian Webber asked if the statement could be passed to the Cabinet Member for Transport.

The Chairman replied that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The Panel confirmed the minutes of August 23^rd 2012 and September 11^th 2012 as a true record and they were duly signed by the Chairman.

This item gives the Panel an opportunity to ask questions to the Cabinet Member(s) and for them to update the Panel on any current issues.

The Chairman asked if a written report had been received in the absence of Councillor David Dixon, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods.

The Democratic Services Officer replied that he had not received one.

Councillor Roger Symonds, Cabinet Member for Transport addressed the Panel. He informed them that a consensus had been gained from those who had attended the recent transport conference as to how the Transport Strategy should be devised. He added that he was hoping to include parking as part of the strategy.

He stated that a vast response had been received from the public regarding the Resident’s Parking Survey and that the zones would be analysed as part of the next steps of the project.

He said that he had met with representatives of First to discuss how they and the Council could work better together in relation to bus services. He added that First had signed a memorandum of understanding. A Stakeholder Panel was also in the process of being set-up which would include a senior representative from First and would meet every quarter.

He informed them that he would be meeting with the Highways Agency on November 7^th to discuss amongst other things the A46 and the request by Claverton Parish Council to have a limit of 50mph imposed in the area.

He stated that the Batheaston Bridge must be completed before the end of March 2013. The bridge will link Batheaston to the towpath and form part of National Cycle Route 4.

The Chairman asked if it was reasonable to suggest that the Transport Strategy would be in place in one year’s time.

Councillor Roger Symonds replied yes.

Councillor Geoff Ward thanked him for his liaison with the Highways Agency on the A46. He added however that he was disappointed not to have been invited to the recent transport conference or the announcement that was due to be made later in the afternoon regarding East of Bath Park & Ride sites.

Councillor Roger Symonds replied that the capacity of the venue for the conference was limited but assured the Panel that all political groups were represented. He apologised for not inviting Councillor Ward to the announcement of the proposed East of Bath Park & Ride sites.

Councillor David Martin asked if there were to be any further Civitas projects.

Councillor Roger Symonds replied that bids had been submitted for a decision in May 2013 on projects working with electric freight distribution and for further cycles in the area.

Councillor David Martin commented that he would be interested to see the new Stakeholder Panel in action and that he would like to see a copy of the memorandum of understanding that had been signed by First.

Councillor Roger Symonds replied that he would send a copy to the Panel.

Councillor Caroline Roberts asked if the bus user’s panel that had been set up around two years ago would be retained.

Councillor Roger Symonds replied that the work of the bus user’s panel needed to be re-visited to see  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

The Panel will receive a verbal update on this item from the Policy & Environment Manager.

The Policy & Environment Manager introduced this item to the Panel. He explained that the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was a partial replacement of the Section 106 agreements and was a tax on developments.

He stated that the Panel had previously looked at a draft form of CIL rates across the Council and that the Cabinet had agreed a draft proposal earlier in the year. He added that a CIL could only be introduced once a Core Strategy was in place and therefore the Panel could expect to receive further information once the Core Strategy had been agreed.

He said that the introduction of the CIL was currently planned for April 2014.

The Chairman on behalf of the Panel thanked him for the update.

The Panel will receive a verbal update on this item from the Planning Policy Officer.

The Planning Officer introduced this item to the Panel. She explained that a decision was due on the Sustainable Construction & Retrofitting SPD at the December meeting of the Cabinet alongside the Green Deal.

She informed them of the very successful Open Homes visits that took place earlier in the year and that further such events were planned for 2013. She added that 30 written responses had been received during the public consultation and all had been positive. Also, as a result of the consultation it was deemed necessary to give further guidelines on Listed Building Consent.

Councillor Ian Gilchrist asked if the SPD and the Green Deal were to be linked together for the Cabinet meeting.

The Planning Officer replied that both reports reference each other but she was unsure of the actual running order of the agenda at the Cabinet meeting.

The Chairman on behalf of the Panel thanked her for the update.

In response to concerns about the impact of high levels of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) in Bath, the Cabinet considered a mixture of planning controls and housing-led solutions on 14th March 2012. The Cabinet agreed to make a non-immediate Article 4 Direction covering Houses in Multiple Occupation in Bath. Once confirmed, the Article 4 Direction will be supported by a Supplementary Planning Policy setting out the framework within which planning applications for a change of use from a dwelling house to a small HMO will be considered.  The first draft of this has now been prepared entitled Houses in Multiple Occupation in Bath: Supplementary Planning Document (Consultation Draft) and is presented to Cabinet for agreement to publish for public consultation in Oct – Nov 2012.

The Planning Officer introduced this item to the Panel. She informed them that in March 2012 the Cabinet agreed to make a non-immediate Article 4 Direction covering Houses in Multiple Occupation in Bath. She added that the first draft of the Houses in Multiple Occupation in Bath: Supplementary Planning Document (Consultation Draft) had now been prepared and was to be presented to Cabinet later this week for their agreement to publish for public consultation in Oct – Nov 2012. The final decision on whether to implement the Article 4 Direction, adopt the Supplementary Planning Document and to proceed with Additional Licencing scheme for HMOs will follow in Spring 2013.

The Chairman asked if she could describe what was meant by an ‘exempt area’.

The Planning Officer replied that one resident had requested that Lorne Road be exempted from the scheme due to fears about the impact on their ability to sell their house at market rate if the Article 4 Direction is confirmed as they believe that 90% of the properties are already an HMO. She added that there are currently no plans to make any areas exempt.

The Chairman asked how an ‘area’ was defined.

The Planning Officer replied that it was defined as a super output area via the results of the census. She added that this information would be on the Council’s website and would be refreshed every 6 months.

Councillor Geoff Ward commented that he understood the strategy behind the proposal but feared that the true cost of the process had yet been fully realised. He added that he hoped that enforcement measures on issues such as tidy gardens, car parking and street litter would be carried out.

The Planning Officer replied that following the Panel’s comments on this matter in December 2011 the costs associated with the process had been analysed and could be found in section three of the current report. She added that enforcement measures had been built into the cost model of the Planning element of the process.

Councillor Ian Gilchrist asked if the additional licensing measures were to be synced with the introduction of an Article 4 Direction.

The Planning Officer replied that yes, they were both due to be introduced at the same time. She added that joint consultation events were planned and would investigate whether this could be further highlighted within the document.

Councillor Caroline Roberts asked for confirmation that it was to be the whole of Bath that was to be subject to the Article 4 Direction.

The Planning Officer replied yes. She added that the additional licensing measures would only affect the wards of Westmoreland, Oldfield Park, Widcombe and some further whole streets.

Councillor Brian Webber asked if landlords had to submit full drawings with their application.

The Planning Officer replied that all the requirements for applicants were set out within Section 6 of the SPD.

Councillor Brian Webber commented that he was in favour of the policy, but felt that a balance should be found that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

The Panel will receive a presentation on this item from the Group Manager for Planning Policy & Transport.

The Group Manager for Planning Policy & Transport gave a presentation to the Panel regarding this item, a copy of which can be found on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

Transport for London’s achievements so far:

•  7.5% modal shift from car to public transport

•  40% increase in bus usage

•  7% per year increase in Underground usage

•  100% increase in cycling mode share

•  20% reduction to traffic in central London (due mainly to Congestion Charging)

•  Introduction of Oyster smartcard ticketing on the rail network throughout London

Key Policy areas:

•  Integration of land use development and transport

•  Achieving the most efficient use of the transport system

•  Providing further transport capacity

•  Managing demand for transport

Mode shift is the best way to achieve sustainable growth.

A strategy for London 2031 was gained by:

•  Strong political leadership

•  Making the case for investment

•  A balanced approach to sustainable transport

•  Demonstrating the ability to deliver

How to get Bath a strategy to 2031:

•  Founded on economic development and growth strategy

•  Respect the World Heritage status of the city

•  Environmentally sound

•  Meet the aspirations of elected members

•  Coherent and fundable (not necessarily funded)

The Group Manager for Planning Policy & Transport then shared some of the priorities from groups who had attended the recent transport conference.

Federation of Bath Residents Association:

•  Reducing through traffic (HGV ban, use of alternatives eg an A36-A46 link and using A420)

•  Keeping unavoidable through traffic moving on the designated through route (A36)

•  Reducing traffic in the centre (eg Queen Square)

Chamber of Commerce:

•  P&R on each side of the city

•  More and better buses

•  Focused development around the railways station – opportunities provided by electrification.

•  Accessible city for their workforce

Bath Preservation Trust:

•  Comprehensive modelling

•  Over-arching strategy but not necessarily one ‘grand’ solution (see Buchanan)

•  Incremental strategic change in agreed direction

•  Strong leadership

Conclusions:

1. Support for less cars in the city
2. Support for improving air quality
3. Support for more P&R, trains, cycling & walking
4. Business want accessibility for their workforce
5. Need to address the issue of through traffic east:west & north:south
6. Sequence for environmental improvements to achieve 1. above
7. Coach parking/drop-off

Next steps:

•  Need to develop a work programme for these outstanding issues

•  Need to engage with those not at the conference

•  Other residents, Wiltshire, other interest groups

•  and over the next 12 months prepare a Transport Strategy to take back to those who contributed on 18^th September

The Chairman asked if it was the intention to now formulate a single joined up strategy.

The Group Manager for Planning Policy & Transport replied that the Council needed to create a single document that showed how it would fit in with all the other strategies.

The Chairman asked how the loss in parking revenue would be absolved.

The Group Manager for Planning Policy & Transport replied  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

The Panel will receive a presentation on this item from the Transportation Policy Manager.

The Transportation Planning Manager gave a presentation on this item, a copy of which can be found on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

Aims:

•  Improve quality of life

•  Reduce need to travel into city centre by car

•  Consistent with JLTP3, Sustainable Community Strategy, Core Strategy

Objectives:

•  Manage travel demand

•  Sustain and enhance the local economy

•  Provide a balance between good public transport and short stay parking

•  Effectively manage total parking supply – priorities/regulation/charges

Progress:

•  Support assumption of 10% modal shift between 2001 and 2026 to reduce demand

•  Work commissioned on viability of rail based P&R site at Bathampton

•  Need to align with revised with Core Strategy growth in housing and jobs to 2031 and assess financial impact.

West of England trends and Joint Local Transport Plan 3 targets:

•  50% growth in rail use between 2004 and 2009. Target growth of 41% between 2008 and 2019

•  5% growth in bus use between 2003/4 and 2011/12.  Target growth of 11th between 2008/09 and 2015/16

•  Cycle use target growth of 76% by 2015/16

Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) Survey:

•  Manual on street occupancy surveys carried out in 2009

•  Residents’ survey carried out in May 2012

•  Distributed to 21,254 households

•  5453 responses received

•  26% response rate

Controlled Parking Zone Survey Results

:

•  On-street occupancy typically around 45%

•  Central Zone occupancy significantly higher at between 71% and 100%

•  All on street parking spaces in Central Zone fully occupied on Saturday from 7pm onwards

Greatest concern from residents in the Central Zone:

•  Parking difficult for residents (39%)

•  Need residents’ permits (25%)

•  Need option to parking in outer zone (10%)

Other specific concerns:

•  School parking (Zones 2, 11 and A)

•  Dangerous parking (Zones 9 and A)

•  More enforcement (Zones 3 and 11)

•  New development (Zones 5 and 6)

•  HMO/Students (Zone 5)

•  Hotels (Zone 7)

Proposed Controlled Parking Zone actions:

•  Review operational guidelines to meet objectives of CPZ

•  Review Central Zone

•  Allocation of residents and visitor permits

•  Extending enforcement into evenings

•  Redefine Central Zone together with Zones 1,6 and 7

•  Increase number of available parking spaces

•  Majority of residents who expressed an opinion are against extending CPZ

•  Review individual streets against operational guidelines

•  Provide P&R bus stops on Newbridge Rd near RUH

The Chairman asked that officers bear in mind the effect that removing any parking within the City will have on the safety of women. She asked if any areas with a high degree of HMO’s had asked for a residents parking scheme.

The Transportation Planning Manager replied that it had been raised in the context of Oldfield Park, but the residents were clear that they did not want to have a scheme in place.

Councillor Brian Webber commented that this issue also required joint political support. He added that roads should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

This report presents the latest workplan for the Panel (Appendix 1).

The Chairman introduced this item to the Panel. She explained that the focus for the November meeting needed to be the Medium Term Service & Resource Plans and therefore the agenda should be as streamlined as possible.

She proposed that the items entitled Core Strategy Update, Gypsy & Traveller Draft Sites Plan and the Placemaking Plan all be deferred until January 2013.

Councillor Caroline Roberts reminded the Panel that they had earlier agreed to also receive a report in January on the outcomes of the Transport Conference. She also suggested that they receive a report in May 2013 regarding the Parking Strategy.

The Panel RESOLVED to agree with the above proposals.