Issue - meetings

This report sets out the call-in by 13 Councillors of the decision relating to the preferred site for a Park & Ride to the East of Bath. The role of the Panel is to consider the issues raised by the call-in and to determine its response.

As noted above, the Chair explained that a request had been received from Christine Boyd to make a statement which would require rule 27 to be used, to suspend rule 32. Panel members voted unanimously to agree to use rule 27 to suspend rule 32.

The Chair asked if any Panel members were minded to refer the Call-in to full Council at this point. No members indicated that they were.

Statements from Councillor Millar (Call-in Lead Member) and Councillor Clarke (Cabinet Member for Transport) and Panel questions:

Councillor Bull invited the Lead Councillor for the call-in, Councillor Alison Millar, to make her statement (a copy of this statement is attached to the minutes for this meeting). Councillor Millar spoke to the points in the Call-in notice with particular reference to: loss making options being chosen; the cost of an RUH service not being factored in; the need for a Park and Ride to the East not established; flawed consultation; the final decision being delegated to an officer and therefore not transparent; no business case; lack of Heritage study and flood risk analysis. She stated that the decision had not been sound or robust.

Questions from the Panel to the Lead Call-in Councillor

Councillor Bull asked Councillor Millar to explain how the consultation had not been clear. Councillor Millar explained that the way the questions were set out were not clear and that the consultation was now 15 months old and irrelevant. 

Councillor Patterson asked if we should not be pleased that two thousand cars will use Park and Ride services. Councillor Millar stated that she does not think that this would be the result of the project (she explained that a public statement later in the meeting would cover this point in more detail).

Councillor Patterson asked if there were any other areas that should have been covered by the business case. Councillor Millar replied that there was no business case yet.

Following a request from the panel, the Principal Solicitor explained the effect of section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972.

________________

Councillor Bull invited the Cabinet Member for Transport, Councillor Anthony Clarke to make his statement. Councillor Clarke explained that a clear decision had been made on 25^th January 2017 at the Cabinet meeting. He explained that the Cabinet were not asked to make a planning decision and were not asked to give approval for a full business case; Cabinet was asked to decide on a preferred location which they did. He explained that the decision was well informed with ample evidence. Councillor Clarke addressed the 9 points of the Call-in notice referring to the Response table circulated at the meeting (a copy of this document is kept on the Council’s minute book). Councillor Clarke made reference to the following points in the Response table: sites F and B were consulted on; all but one of the recommendations from the Scrutiny Inquiry Day were accepted; the LDF group included ward members and no objections were raised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 135

Cabinet at its meeting on May 4th 2016 considered and noted reports from the cross party Local Development Framework (LDF) Steering Group and the Communities Transport and Environment Policy Development & Scrutiny Panel (CTEPDS) on the issue of the Park and Ride (P&R) east of Bath. Cabinet’s responses to the recommendations of the CTEPDS Panel, as agreed at this meeting, are set out below.  This report outlines the work undertaken since May and recommends which site should be promoted as a P&R east of Bath.

Emma Adams read out the statement where she said that there was no need for another Park and Ride and that the Council had not provided business case.  Emma Adams also said that visitor numbers had been inflated during Christmas Market period, and that those numbers were not true reflection on the average number of people coming to Bath.  Emma Adams concluded her statement by saying that there was a lack of communication from the Council and that the whole process was undemocratic and secretive, without the relevant facts and figures.

Harry Adams (11 year old) said that he had studied proposals for the Park and Ride but that he had not seen a real need for another Park and Ride.  Harry Adams also said that another 1,000 cars would not make much difference to the traffic in London Road; other Park and Rides had not been used well; concerns about the wildlife in Meadows; and that technology is moving forward so parking and pollution in Bath would not be an issue.

Annie Kilvington gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Lisa Brown gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Fiona Powell gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Peter Davenport gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Alison Smith gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Derek Redding gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Piers Taylor gave a statement (on behalf of Andrew Lea) by saying that only 57% of existing Park and Rides around Bath were used during the busiest times.  Piers Taylor also said that the images presented by the officers were misleading, that Park and Ride would not be concealed by planting trees, that the proposed development was ecologically illiterate and it would be an act of environmental vandalism, and that Park and Ride East of Bath was not a solution for traffic problems.

David Dunlop gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Phil Johnston gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Christine Boyd gave a statement (attached as Appendix and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park and Ride proposals.

Andrew Mercer gave a statement and presented a document to the Cabinet (both attached as Appendices and available on the Minute Book at Democratic Services) speaking against the Park  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66

A new park and ride is part of a package of improvement works in and around the City, identified in the ‘Getting Around Bath’ transport strategy, which was approved by Council 14^th November 2014.  The Cabinet, at its meeting on 8th July, agreed to undertake a public consultation on the options to identify a preferred location for a new Park & Ride east of Bath.  This report outlines the issues raised to date through the consultation process and the wider issues surrounding proposals for a Park and Ride facility to the east of Bath

Following submissions from over 80 members of the public about this issue, the Council considered the submissions to them and the report outlining the issues raised to date through the consultation process on proposals for a Park and Ride facility to the east of Bath.

On a motion from Councillor Tim Warren, seconded by Councillor Anthony Clarke, it was

RESOLVED

1.  To note the officer report, including the evidence of need and the results of the consultation.

2.  To reaffirm its commitment to delivering an East of Bath Park & Ride as part of an integrated transport strategy which also includes improvements to local rail services through the MetroWest project, investment in safe walking and cycling routes, support for local bus services, and progress towards an East of Bath link-road.

3.  To ask that the cross-party Local Development Framework Steering Group review all the options for the location of an East of Bath Park & Ride prior to Cabinet selecting a preferred site early next year, giving due consideration to the following:

·  The responses received to the East of Bath Park & Ride consultation;

·  The feasibility and deliverability of each site option;

·  The costs associated with each site option;

·  The transport benefits of each site option;

·  The visual impact of each site option.

4.  That, in addition, Cabinet and officers are also asked to give consideration to:

·  Measures to reduce the number of high-polluting vehicles entering Bath, such as a Low Emission Zone, alongside the delivery of the Park & Ride;

·  Measures to ensure the protection of bus services to the villages east of Bath alongside the delivery of the Park & Ride;

·  Measures to mitigate any visual and environmental impacts of the Park & Ride, whichever site is ultimately selected, including looking at ‘best practice’ examples from elsewhere in the country and abroad.

·  The potential of providing a shuttle-bus service from the new Park & Ride to the RUH.

5.  To ask that Cabinet and officers continue to engage with the Parish Councils and communities on the East of Bath on the proposals for a Park & Ride, and that once a site has been selected and more detailed proposals produced, further public engagement is undertaken as part of the planning process.

6.  That, alongside plans for an East of Bath Park & Ride, Cabinet is asked to develop a fully costed business case for an East of Bath link-road and continues efforts to work alongside our local MPs, neighbouring authorities, Highways England, the West of England Local Enterprise Partnership and the Department for Transport to lobby for the necessary funding to deliver this project; and

7.  To call for the Communities, Transport and Environment Policy Development & Scrutiny Panel to undertake an open and transparent public scrutiny, examining a wide range of integrated transport solutions for the East of Bath.

[Notes;

1  During debate, an unsuccessful amendment was moved by Councillor John Bull and seconded by Councillor Neil Butters, covering much of the wording above, but without a specific commitment to an east of Bath Park & Ride, nor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59