Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

Councillor Auton gave his apologies and was substituted by Councillor Gourley.

Councillor Johnson gave his apologies.

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 4.4 Appendix 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.

There were none.

There was none.

The following members of the public made a statement to the Panel. Panel members asked some questions.

Mike Earle made a statement regarding the data from the trial and access to information on this issue.

Councillor Heijltjes asked if Mr Earle lived in Southlands, Mr Earle stated that he did not and that his concern was with the democratic process.

Councillor Player asked if Mr Earle had been refused data when he had requested it. Mr Earle stated that yes on several occasions, he was advised to submit a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

Angie Paddock(statement attached to these minutes)

Councillor Player asked why Ms Paddock thought the 3 weeks of the data collection period was particularly quiet. Ms Paddock explained that during those 3 weeks there was only 1 event at the RUH (Royal United Hospital) when there were usually 3 or 4 per week.

Councillor Heijltjes asked if Ms Paddock felt supported by the ward Councillors. Ms Paddock stated that the ward Councillor is listening.

Councillor Player asked why Ms Paddock thought groups of cyclists appeared when the cameras were installed. Ms Paddock stated that she believed the cycling group had been contacted.

Councillor Player asked if the aim of the scheme of a safer, healthier environment had been achieved. Ms Paddock stated that it worked for one side of Southlands but was a two-tier situation.

Meg Collin(statement attached to these minutes)

Councillor Heijltjes asked if Ms Collin believes the outcome of the survey would be different if parking issues are resolved. Ms Collin stated that she does not know but would like to say yes.

Councillor Wait asked if she believed 21 cyclists per day is reasonable, Ms Collin stated that she had not counted but his seems reasonable.

Councillor Gourley asked about the public transport in Weston. Ms Collin stated that it was a better service then anywhere else she had lived but could still be improved.

Peter Heywood - Chair – Future Weston (statement attached to these minutes)

Councillor Heijltjes asked how Future Weston would suggest the streets could be made safer. Mr Heywood stated that this was not a problem in the first place. Restricted parking may be looked at.

John Chapman made a statement mentioning that, in his view, the scheme had created an ‘unliveable neighbourhood’. He explained that there are now reversing vehicles and it is the wrong scheme in the wrong place. It has caused division.

In response to a question from Councillor Player, Mr Chapman stated that the planters should be removed and the money spent on the High Street.

In response to a question from Councillor Wait, Mr Chapman confirmed he was not a resident.

Councillor Wait confirmed that members of the public are able to register to make a statement at Panel meeting. Nobody was stopped from making a public statement.

Councillor Malcolm Treby made a statement and urged the Panel to uphold the call in and recommend removal.

Councillor Heijltjes asked how Councillor Treby had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

Lead Call in Councillor statement – Councillor Robin Moss

Councillor Moss explained that of the three schemes, this one had been called in due to public opposition. He stated that he was not against measures to make neighbourhoods cleaner and safer but schemes do need to have public support. He stated that a traffic circulation plan for the whole of BANES is needed. He asked for a reset on this decision and a conversation with the local community.

Panel members made the following points and asked the following questions:

Councillor David asked Councillor Moss how confident he was that the majority oppose the scheme currently. Councillor Moss pointed to the statistics in the Council papers which state that 71% of the local community oppose the scheme.

Councillor Heijltjes asked why the call for a BANES circulation plan had not been called for sooner. Councillor Moss explained that, as ward member for Westfield, he had called for this many times for his area.

Councillor Halsall stated that if this scheme is scrapped, funding could be lost for the wider scheme. Councillor Moss stated that this has been a concern but that the WECA Mayor would not allow single schemes to effect overall policy.

Councillor Player asked if a decision should be based on money, we should put resident’s views first as that is who we represent. Councillor Moss explained that this is one of the smaller schemes and it should be about spending money wisely.

Cabinet Member for Highways, Councillor Manda Rigby, statement

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Councillor Rigby stated that the aim of the programme is safer, quieter more equitable streets. She explained that the issues of through traffic and parking were identified at the start of the process, the scheme had not attempted to address parking. She explained that there have been 6 engagement/consultation opportunities – 3 prior to the trial, 2 during the trial and 1 afterwards. In terms of the 71% figure – this refers to the open public consultation which was not restricted to Southlands residents. It is intended that monitoring will take place in April 2024 which will take into account different routes.

Panel members made the following points and asked the following questions:

Councillor Leach asked why respondent’s addresses were not taken in the public consultation. The Cabinet Member explained that the wider public view was taken first.

Councillor Heijltjes asked how much was spent on consultants. The Cabinet Member stated that she did not have a specific number for this.

Councillor Halsall asked that, if the scheme goes ahead, would there be funding for other things in the community. The Cabinet Member stated that, if the scheme does not go ahead, we cannot do other things such as barriers for reversing. She explained it was not an intention to split the community. She stated that the number of people who have engaged has declined, a lot of people have not expressed an opinion. She added that the issue of parking needs to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.