Agenda and minutes

The Chair (Councillor Kevin Guy) welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The Chair invited all Cabinet Members to introduce themselves.

The Chair also informed the meeting that speakers will have their opportunity to address the Cabinet before questions from public and Councillors.

The Chair will draw attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out in the Notes

The Senior Democratic Services Officer drew attention to the evacuation procedure with health and safety notice.

There were no apologies for absence.

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 Officeror a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer issued an urgent and temporary dispensation of interest declaration for this meeting only to all Members who either live, work or represent their Wards affected by the Active Travel Plans and Liveable Neighbourhoods items in order that those agenda items may be appropriately debated and determined at this Cabinet meeting.

There was none.

The Chair used this opportunity to read out the following statement:

‘Before we move on, I’d like to give an update on the issue of urban gull nuisance.

As many residents know, the rules around gull controls were made much stricter last year. B&NES needed a new licence from Natural England to carry out treatments, including nest and egg removal. We asked residents to help us by supplying evidence in support of our application.

Under the new licence the bar for intervention has been set very high. Controls may only be caried out to preserve public health or safety and as a last resort if non-lethal measures are ineffective.

This means that in most cases, we are not legally allowed to remove nests or eggs, despite the serious problems they cause, including gull attacks and sleep deprivation.

This is clearly unacceptable, and I have written to Natural England to raise our concerns about the impact on residents. We understand that Natural England are willing to listen to feedback from Councils about how they approach this situation next year.

We are calling for a wider programme of treatments to be allowed and for the intervention benchmark to be reassessed for urban gulls. This would enable us to assist more of our long-suffering residents.’

Questions submitted before the deadline will receive a reply from an appropriate Cabinet member or a promise to respond within 5 days of the meeting.  Councillors may ask one supplementary question for each question they submitted, up to a maximum of two per Councillor.

There were 14 questions from Councillors and no questions from members of the public.

[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.]

Councillors and members of the public may register their intention to make a statement if they notify the subject matter of their statement before the deadline.  Statements are limited to 3 minutes each.  The speaker may then be asked by Cabinet members to answer factual questions arising out of their statement.

Fia Heijltjes (6 years old and accompanied by parent) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 2 and on the Council's website] addressed her concerns with road safety.

David Redgewell made a statement around traffic and bus issues in West of England Combined Authority as per background paper circulated to the Cabinet in advance of the meeting.

Susan Charles in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3 and on the Council's website] expressed her concerns about future of parking spaces for Blue Badge holders.

Shiva Page in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4 and on the Council's website] expressed a number of concerns related to Equality Impact Assessments on Clean Air Zone, Liveable Neighbourhoods and Active Travel Schemes.

Martin Grixoni in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 5 and on the Council's website] said that he was concerned about misplaced priorities, in particular with recycling and refuse collection.

Allison Herbert in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 6 and on the Council's website] where she highlighted the reasons and benefits of having Bath Christmas Market, and the issues which people mostly complain about , such as access, parking and transport.

Kathryn Davis addressed the Cabinet by supporting Bath Christmas Market as a unique event for local and national visitor experience.  Kathryn Davies welcomed the report before the Cabinet by saying that this was an opportunity to deliver an event in 2021 which would provide phenomenal boost to local economy, tourism, and hospitality network.

Charlie Williams said that there would always be those who would be for and against Active Travel Schemes but the Cabinet should stay consistent and continue to combat climate change by trailing and eventually implementing schemes which may not always be popular with all residents.

Jeremy Labram (Chair, Camden Residents’ Association) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 7 and on the Council's website] said that the residents were keen to get into in the Liveable Neighbourhood programme as soon as possible.  The association would also like to see the detail of the assessment of the Walcot bid to understand what the project team’s misgivings were over complexity and challenge so the residents could start to address those now.

Rachael Hushon in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 8 and on the Council's website] said that residents who live in the lower Lansdown area were grateful to the Council who have recognised that the Kingsmead area and lower Lansdown needed to be looked at in a joined up way with regards to Liveable neighbourhood planning.

Lynda Lloyd in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 9  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 20^th May 2021 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

This is a standard agenda item, to cover any reports originally placed on the Weekly list for single Member decision making, which have subsequently been the subject of a Cabinet Member requisition to the full Cabinet, under the Council’s procedural rules

There were none.

This is a standing agenda item (Constitution rule 14, part 4D – Executive Procedure Rules) for matters referred by Policy Development and Scrutiny bodies.  The Chair of the relevant PDS Panel will have the right to attend and to introduce the Panel’s recommendations to Cabinet.

There were none.

A list of Cabinet Single Member decisions taken and published since the last Cabinet meeting to note (no debate).

The Cabinet agreed to note the report.

Councillor Richard Samuel wanted to draw Cabinet’s attention to the two decisions he has made recently: the discretionary business rate scheme for 21/22 and BANES businesses in hardship by providing 100% relief to qualifying hospitality and leisure businesses for 3 months then falling to 66% for the remaining 9 months of the year, and a land disposal at less than market value to enable the construction of a new primary school in Keynsham.

The Bath Christmas Market transferred from Visit Bath to the Council in January 2021.

With the expected lifting of social distancing measures in June, or at some point shortly after,  the Council now needs to decide whether to proceed with planning and delivery of Bath Christmas Market in 2021, with the uncertainty over the pandemic and variants of concern entering the UK.

The Bath Christmas Market provides the gateway to an annual economic uplift for multiple commercial sectors such as accommodation, retail, hospitality and tourism in the B&NES region. The market gives a platform to local charities and supports community groups through a wide range of projects and local initiatives. 

Councillor Dine Romero introduced the report by reading out the following statement:

‘We need decide tonight whether to proceed with planning, and delivery of the Bath Christmas Market 2021.

As you will recall last year’s Christmas market was cancelled due to the rapid increase in cases without the backstop of a mass vaccination program. Uncertainty still remains due to the increases in case numbers, however this increase must be considered alongside the fact that the majority of adults are now being vaccinated, and there are low-far the cases are less severe cases and people are not ending up in our hospitals. Be assured, I am not underplaying the severity of the pandemic, and will along with the local SAGE be keeping an eye on the situation and changes will be made as required.

However, if we are to have the Christmas Market, we need to decide that now. We are already about 4 months behind where we would be in a normal year, if you can remember what that was like!

I am hopeful that all on cabinet will see that we must decide to proceed. The economic wellbeing of the city, and its traders depends on us making the right decision now.

I know some have asked to move the market to Victoria Park for example, but if we did that then the extra business for our hard pressed local traders will be lost, following such a year this could be death knell for many who are hanging on to survival by their fingertips.

The market is ranked in the top 10 of Europe, and attracts 400k visitors each year, with an estimated spend of £32.5 million in 2019. Half of which is spent elsewhere in the city, on food drink, entertainment, travel and other shopping. The market directly or indirectly supports about 500 actual jobs.

We know that greater proportion of visitors to the market are local, with perhaps 40% coming from further afield. But we are not expecting as many visitors this as that not least as we will not be marketing internationally.

As in previous years we will be asking all to travel sustainably, to use the P&Rs, or public transport wherever possible. This will also be the most sustainable market so far, we are clamping down on the use of single use plastics, relishes etc won’t be offered in plastic sachets, LED lights will be used throughout, reliance on fossil fuels on site will replaced by mains fed electricity points.

The market itself will have an increased footprint, while the number of chalets is being reduced from 205 to 161, with spaces built into the arrangement, and the footprint of the overall market will increase. This will help manage social distancing, and help people stay safe.

The high numbers of visitors can be inconvenient for our residents, but we have a range offers to help. These include a residents-only pre-market event, advertised quieter times for those with autism or who appreciate less bustle,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

The council consulted on three proposed active travel schemes in February and March this year. A decision needs to be made on whether those schemes should proceed to the next stage of consultation.

Two of the three schemes would be funded from the government’s Active Travel Fund. The government, in recent funding announcements, withheld funds from authorities that did not submit bids or those that were considered weak. There are potential implications on future government funding for active travel schemes if they do not go ahead or if they are not built in accordance with the latest design standards.

This report outlines the results from the consultation, provides options and potential amendments to the proposals to take account of feedback from the consultation, and recommends next steps.

Councillor Sarah Warren introduced the report by reading out the following statement:

‘The Cabinet will be considering and voting on this item with regard to amended drawings UBR 3 and 4, now updated on the council website. These corrected drawings show the ‘buffer’ area at one of the parking bays and bus stops that had been accidentally omitted.

I would like to thank everyone who submitted questions. It hasn’t been possible to answer them all before the meeting. If any are not answered either within the report, or through this evening’s discussion, they should be emailed to ActiveTravel_FundConsultation@bathnes.gov.uk .

On 14 Mar 2019, a climate emergency was declared here in the Guildhall. Many councillors that day, typically of extensive life experience, told how they had discussed the environmental crisis with their children and grandchildren, before deciding how to vote. Their youngsters had impressed upon them the enormity of the crisis, which looms large in young lives. And vote they did, some of you here tonight, almost unanimously, to reduce emissions to zero by 2030.

We know 29% of carbon emissions in B&NES come from land transport. Our greatest priority for reducing these is for each of us to drive less.

We also face a public health crisis: of obesity, of mental health, of air pollution affecting our lungs. These all originate in part from low levels of physical activity. The great news is that that feeling of the wind in your hair, cycling in safety, is not only great fun, but at the same time, it can help us tackle all of these problems. Commuting by bike is a great way to build a few minutes of exercise and happiness into your life on a daily basis.

As a Council, the main way we can influence travel behaviour is through the infrastructure on our roads. We know that the biggest impediment to taking up cycling is perceived danger, and we are going to change that in Bath and North East Somerset, starting with the Upper Bristol and Beckford Roads.

Now, you might have noticed, Cabinet, that Bath is not Milton Keynes. Our roads were designed before the advent of cars and even of bikes. There are purist cyclists in this city complaining that our plans are not perfect for cyclists in every way, and at the expense of other road users.

But we know that there are still people in Bath and North East Somerset who don’t cycle… (yet). We have listened to all responses as government asked us, and we hear that people have legitimate concerns. On the advice of our expert staff, and in line with best design practice, we have made changes to accommodate businesses and disabled residents, as well as other road users. In response to feedback, we have planned in improvements to pavements, spaces for loading, and additional residents’ parking.

Because of our narrow, historic streets, we have compromised cycle infrastructure in some areas, but let’s be clear, these cycle routes will still be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

At its meeting on 10th December 2020, Cabinet adopted the three Liveable Neighbourhood strategies (Low Traffic Neighbourhoods; Residents’ Parking Schemes; and On-Street Electric Vehicle Charging Strategy). This report provides an update on work undertaken since that Cabinet meeting and recommends priority areas for liveable neighbourhood schemes.

Councillor Sarah Warren introduced the report by reading out the following statement:

‘Liveable Neighbourhoods are residential areas where road space is reconsidered. They create pleasant outdoor environments in which people can relax and socialise and enjoy spending time. They are safe, welcoming spaces for outdoor activity, where neighbours are able to make more connections with one another, and they make for vibrant local high streets where people want to spend time and money.

To create these schemes, a range of measures, which may include vehicle restrictions, traffic calming, residents’ parking zones, additional planting, and electric vehicle charging, are used to reduce the dominance of motor vehicles in residential areas, although people are still able to access their homes by car. By making it safer to move around actively, such measures enable more journeys to take place on foot and have been demonstrated over time to reduce the number of journeys taken by car. This may even reduce congestion on the roads for those with no alternative but to travel by car.

They will not disadvantage, and should actively assist disabled people, by incorporating wider pavements and disabled parking spaces where needed, and by enabling more people who can, to leave their cars at home.

The schemes are an important part of the council’s wider programme of works aiming to reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality, enhance road safety, and promote healthy lifestyles by encouraging the use of sustainable transport. They will breathe new life into residential areas and improve the quality of the public realm. The programme builds upon our pioneering project bringing in the first charging Clean Air Zone outside London earlier this year.

Some have expressed concern about traffic displacement, and about air quality impacts outside the schemes. Whilst displacement can be an issue in the initial few days, over the weeks that follow installation, a new pattern of traffic flow develops, as people find new routines – and fewer of these new routines will involve a car. However, we do recognise people’s real worries, so as for the Clean Air Zone, we will commit to monitoring locations of concern, so that we can determine the facts, and take action if necessary.

Cabinet adopted our Liveable Neighbourhoods policy on 10th December 2020 following a consultation on the principles, which received over 1,500 responses, demonstrating overwhelming support for the concept.

47 schemes were submitted, and tonight, Cabinet, I am bringing forward to you the first 15 that we are proposing to take forward for detailed community consultation and design, the next stages in the process. 12 of these are in Bath, and 3 in North East Somerset, reflecting the fact that many more Bath councillors made submissions.

This is absolutely not a policy, however, that can only work in cities, and I would strongly encourage all North East Somerset councillors to reconsider, ahead of the next deadline on 5th August, whether their residents might also benefit, along with people in Bath, from a pleasanter public realm, and calmer residential  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.