Meeting documents

BATH AND NORTH EAST SOMERSET COUNCIL

COUNCIL EXECUTIVE

Wednesday 10th January 2007

PRESENT -:

Councillor Paul Crossley - Leader
Councillor Francine Haeberling - Social Services
Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE - Transport and Highways
Councillor Jonathan Gay - Children's Services
Councillor Gerry Curran - Sustainability and the Environment
Councillor Malcolm Hanney - Resources
Councillor Vic Pritchard - Community Safety, Housing & Consumer Services

98 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

The Chair was taken by Councillor Paul Crossley, Leader of the Council.

99 EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE

The Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the Agenda.

100 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies had been received from Councillors Nicole O'Flaherty and Colin Darracott.

101 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Malcolm Hanney declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest relating to Agenda Item 12, as Chair of the Primary Care Trust.

102 TO ANNOUNCE ANY URGENT BUSINESS AGREED BY THE CHAIR(PERSON)

There was none.

103 QUESTIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

There were 10 questions from the following people: Ian Thorn, Nicholas Coombes, Armand Edwards, Councillor Gitte Dawson (2), Councillor Caroline Roberts (2), Councillor Roger Symonds (3)

[Copies of the questions and responses, including supplementary questions and responses if any, have been placed on the Minute book as Appendix 1 and are available on the Council's website.]

104 STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS OR PETITIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

Due notice had been given of 2 statements.

Gavin Douglas, Director of The Silver Shop, indicated that he wished to speak just before Agenda item 14.

Councillor Gitte Dawson made a statement on sustainability(a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 2). There were no factual questions from Executive members.

105 MINUTES: WEDNESDAY 6TH DECEMBER 2006

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, it was

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 6th December 2006 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

106 CONSIDERATION OF SINGLE MEMBER ITEMS NOW REQUISITIONED TO COUNCIL EXECUTIVE (Report 9).

There were none.

107 CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS REFERRED BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY BODIES (Report 10).

The Chair announced that a Review of the Future For Bath Vision had been conducted by the Major Projects and Outside Bodies Overview and Scrutiny Panel and that the Panel's recommendations would be considered at Agenda item 13.

108 ONE SCHOOL PATHFINDER - PROGRESS REPORT (Report 11).

Councillor Jonathan Gay, in introducing the item, pointed out that this was an update report, as requested by the Council Executive at an earlier meeting. He said that in moving his proposal, he would not move paragraph 2.3 of the officer recommendations.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal. He wished to say that it was excellent news that theAuthority was able to rebuild an entire school. He said that it was now the responsibility of the Council to deliver the new school on time and on budget.

Rationale

The planned renewal of Writhlington School represents a major opportunity for the Authority to demonstrate that it has the capacity to provide innovative new learning environments. Success of the project in terms of timescale, budget and articulation of an educational vision may have a positive effect on the Authority's overall position in the Building Schools for the Future Programme.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Jonathan Gay, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) The planned renewal of Writhlington School represents a major opportunity for the Authority to demonstrate to itself and other stakeholders that it has the capacity to provide innovative new learning environments;

(2) Successful delivery of the project by the DfES deadline may lead to the Council receiving further funding under the Building Schools for Future programme earlier than currently anticipated.

109 LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT: SECOND DRAFT (Report 12).

Councillor Paul Crossley said that a lot of work remained to be done and that the task was not the easiest, but he felt that it was important to address community partnership. The Local Area Agreement was one way of achieving this. He felt that as the Local Area Agreement developed, it would be necessary to work in partnership with local communities to focus on a smaller number of stretch targets - perhaps 12 - which would in due course be chosen as priorities. He proposed the recommendations.

Councillor Francine Haeberling, in seconding the proposal, agreed that the challenge must be met although it would not prove possible to deliver all the aspirations in the Local Area Agreement.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney said that he felt it should be made clear that there had still not been any clear link between the stretch targets and the resources to fund them. It would now be necessary to focus on a smaller number of achievable priority stretch targets so that all partners could have common expectations.

Rationale

The negotiations between Government Office for the South West (GOSW) and the Council, working with its partners, are now near to completion and it is considered appropriate that the Executive agrees at this stage the process for finalising agreement of the document.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To adopt the second draft of Bath & North East Somerset's Local Area Agreement and that the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Council Leader, be authorised to finalise the agreement document and make arrangements for signature;

(2) That the implications for Council services of targets contained in the agreement be incorporated into the Council's service planning arrangements, and be approved through this process and reported through the Council's performance management systems;

(3) That the financial implications for the Council of the agreement, including pooled and aligned funding, performance reward and pump-priming arrangements be incorporated into the Council's Financial Plan and its budget, and be approved through this process;

(4) That a further report be prepared which sets out options and proposals for use of the Pump-Priming funding which would follow from agreeing the final Local Area Agreement document.

110 EXECUTIVE RESPONSE TO OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY REVIEW OF THE FUTURE FOR BATH VISION (Report 13).

The Chair welcomed Councillor Charles Gerrish, Chair of the Major Projects and Outside Bodies Overview and Scrutiny Panel, and invited him to address the Executive.

Councillor Gerrish said that the Panel had worked conscientiously to prepare their recommendations and that they hoped for a full debate of the issues by the Executive and a clear statement from the Executive that the recommendations were agreed.

Councillor Gitte Dawson made an ad hoc statement in which she expressed her dissatisfaction on a previous occasion that the Council Executive had failed to take ownership of issues raised by an Overview and Scrutiny Panel.

Councillor Paul Crossley moved the proposal as laid out in the previously circulated Response Table (a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3). He said in response to Councillor Dawson that the Council was moving towards a more co-ordinated approach across departments but that such a change of culture inevitably took time to take effect. To Councillor Gerrish he replied that Executive members value the excellent work done by Overview and Scrutiny Panels in scrutinising and developing policy. He said that the Vision was now being rolled out across the Council's area and that Councillor Gerrish's own area of Keynsham would benefit in the future from the approach being taken. He was pleased to point out to Councillor Gerrish that what he was proposing to the Executive was that no recommendations would be rejected; that some recommendations (2.1, 2.3, 4.1 and 4.3) would be partially agreed; and that recommendation 7.1 was to be addressed in the Service Plan process. He therefore anticipated that Councillor Gerrish and the Panel would be encouraged by the Executive response.

He drew attention to the preparatory work done by Councillor Colin Darracott in preparing the proposed responses and to other Executive members for their work in advance of the Executive meeting.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney, in seconding the proposal, emphasised that there was evidence of considerable sign-off across the Council and across political groups. He felt that the Council should have a 20-25 year vision as well as short- and medium-term plans. He wished to demonstrate Executive support for the recommendations within the Council's budgetary constraints.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE expressed his thanks to the Panel for their recommendations and to the Director of Development and Major Projects and his colleagues. He said that there had been collaboration between departments in the preparation of the Vision and acknowledged that obtaining the considerable resources required over a long period of time to achieve the Vision would present a challenge to the Council.

Rationale

The rationale for the Executive's response to each of the Panel's recommendations is given in the Response Table (a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3).

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Malcolm Hanney, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To agree Council Executive's response to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel's Review of the Future For Bath Vision.

111 PARKING PRICE REVIEW (Report 14).

Gavin Douglas, Director of The Silver Shop, made a statement (a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4), in which he appealed to the Executive not to agree the proposed increases in parking charges.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE asked how Mr Douglas would propose to make up the shortfall in the Transportation budget were the parking charges not to be increased. Mr Douglas replied that he would seek to bring into use additional parking places to meet demand, and to introduce spending efficiencies.

The Chair welcomed Eric Snook, Chair of Bath Independent Traders, and invited him to make an ad hoc statement. Mr Snook expressed considerable reservations amongst independent traders in the city about the proposals. He said that should the parking charges be set too high, this would cause a decline in the retail business in the city. He appealed to the Executive to reject the proposals. He suggested that the Council should look to its management of the commercial estate to find ways of maximising its income so that the parking visitor would not have to pay so much.

Councillor Caroline Roberts made an ad hoc statement in which she said that before increasing parking charges, the Executive member should instigate a review of the situation. She pointed out that over half of the proposed increase was caused by a larger than anticipated take-up of free bus passes, which she had warned about in a previous Executive meeting. She expressed surprise that the reduction in income from pay-on-foot parking had not been foreseen.

Councillor Gitte Dawson made an ad hoc statement regretting the omission from the report of any financial analysis of the situation which had led up to the need to increase charges. She said that she believed that many people were now paying less for their parking because they were not being obliged to pay in advance for parking time which in the event they sometimes did not use. She asked the Executive member to consider whether the Council was not perhaps paying too much to the bus operator for the large number of journeys being made under the bus pass scheme and suggested that the Council should negotiate with the bus operator a reduced rate, perhaps on a sliding scale.

Councillor Tim Bull made an ad hoc statement in which he reported that one of his constituents who had parked regularly in Charlotte Street was experiencing a very large increase in charges and had therefore stopped coming into Bath to shop. He felt that the Executive should consider allowing Charlotte Street to be used for shorter-term parking.

Sean Dowling, Manager of Marks and Spencer, made an ad hoc statement pointing out the challenges to Bath from Broadmead, Cribbs Causeway and other surrounding towns and cities. The Southgate development would for a few years cause disruption to the city which would not help retail businesses. He estimated that the effect of the proposed parking charges would be to reduce sales by 10-20%.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE introduced the issue by reminding Executive members that Transportation faced a deficit of £1.4m. He said that those who rejected the recommendations should say how they proposed to remedy the deficit. In response to the suggestion from Mr Snook, he said that the Council was already looking for ways to improve the management of the corporate estate. He observed that the increased take-up of free bus passes should be considered to be a success and that it had therefore brought more shoppers into Bath, to the benefit of the local economy.

Sir Elgar said that he wished to apologise for having to propose increasing parking charges only a year after the previous increases; he accepted that the earlier estimates of the cost of the bus pass scheme and of parking income had both proved to be incorrect. He emphasised however that the proposed charges were still competitive and that the increases for 5-day parking permits were to be introduced over 3 years. There would be no increases at all in Keynsham or Midsomer Norton. Even in Bath, the increase for a 2-hour stay would only increase by 10p. He said that the proposals would have the effect of supporting the Council's Transport policy; in particular, it would encourage the use of Park and Ride.

Finally, Sir Elgar said that private retailers and the Council must both investigate travel to work schemes such as the successful scheme introduced by Wessex Water. Minimising the usage of all-day parking spaces by those who work in the city would have the effect of making extra parking places available for those wishing to give their business to retailers.

Councillor Paul Crossley, in seconding the proposal, agreed that the Southgate development might cause disruption for up to 4 years and that the Council must minimise the impact on the life of the city. He felt that signage should be improved to advise drivers where they would find available spaces. He welcomed the increasing use of bus transport into the city. He said he was delighted to note that during the Christmas market, the city's car parks were full which itself was evidence of a very successful time for retailers.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney observed that the loss of income caused by pay-on-exit must be recouped and the increased charges would be the right way to achieve this. The estimated cost of £700k for the bus pass scheme must also be recouped and there was no other budget from which it could be found. The effect of not increasing the charges now would be even more unwelcome.

Councillor Jonathan Gay said that although all members were uneasy about the proposal, he felt that Sir Elgar had made a strong case. He remembered previous arguments against the Northgate Priority Access Point ("bus gate") and against the introduction of the Christmas market - in both cases the demise of local retailers had been predicted but this had not happened. He supported the proposal.

Councillor Francine Haeberling agreed that with reluctance the proposal had to be supported and suggested that retailers might consider offering a discount to shoppers who spent over a certain amount and who could show a parking ticket, as some supermarkets already do.

Councillor Gerry Curran supported the proposals while agreeing that a dialogue with local retailers should be maintained. He welcomed the successful introduction of the free bus pass and its contribution towards increasing footfall in the city centre. He agreed that the period of the Southgate development would be a challenge to the whole city but anticipated that Bath would continue to thrive during and after the building of Southgate.

Councillor Vic Pritchard expressed his agreement with Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE that there was an element of necessity about the proposal. He pointed out that the Government, while obliging Councils to introduce bus pass schemes, had not funded the schemes. He was concerned that the newly-developed Broadmead might soon be a drain on Bath's economy.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney said he recognised that Southgate, Broadmead and the increased parking charges together would have an impact on local retailers and agreed that they therefore had a valid stake in the decision. He said however that the Council could not be expected to absorb the additional drains on its Transportation budget.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, in summing up, pointed out that the proposed charges were still lower than those charged by Broadmead for comparable lengths of stay. He wanted to say in response to Councillor Dawson's point that the Council along with its partner authorities was actively discussing the formula for payment to the bus operator.

Rationale

Car parking charges were last reviewed in October 2005. These price changes will help tackle congestion by encouraging people to consider using Park & Ride sites, Public Transport, cycling and walking instead of bringing a car into the centre of Bath.

The Council's service planning process has identified that projected income has not been achieved, caused by changes in parking behaviour following the introduction of Pay on Foot and an increase in free bus travel. These anticipated amounts were necessary in order to maintain parking investments and other Transport expenditure.

There is a need to rationalise some off street charges in order to simplify the diverse range of charges in Bath City Centre.

Other Options Considered

Alternative charges have been considered and rejected as being either too costly to be borne by the average motorist or insufficient to enable the Council to achieve its Transport objectives.

On a motion from Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To approve the new prices, noting that charges in Keynsham, Park & Ride sites and in the Coach Park remain unchanged;

(2) That the Director of Customer Services be authorised to take all action necessary to effect such changes.

The Chair thanked all those who had contributed to the discussions.

The meeting ended at 11.40am

Chair(person)

Date Confirmed and Signed

Prepared by Democratic Services