Brighton & Hove City Council
Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee
4.00pm17 January 2023
Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall
Minutes
Present: Councillor Davis (Joint Chair), Hills (Joint Chair), Lloyd (Deputy Chair), Platts (Joint Opposition Spokesperson), Wilkinson (Joint Opposition Spokesperson), Nemeth (Group Spokesperson), Appich, Fowler, Heley and Simson
Part One
59 Procedural Business
59(a) Declarations of substitutes
59.1 Councillor Appich was present as substitute for Councillor McIntosh.
59.2 Councillor Simson was present as substitute for Councillor Bagaeen.
59(b) Declarations of interest
59.3 Councillor Platts declared a non-pecuniary interest on matters relating to public conveniences as an Ambassador and Event Director of Parkrun.
59(c) Exclusion of press and public
59.4 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (“the Act”), the Committee considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the business to be transacted or the nature of proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100(I) of the Act).
59.5 Resolved- That the press and public not be excluded from the meeting.
60 Minutes
60.1 Resolved- That the minutes of the previous meeting be approved as the correct record.
61 Chairs Communications
61.1 The Chair provided the following communication:
“Good afternoon, I’d like to welcome you all to this January meeting of the Environment, Transport and Sustainability committee.
The year began with excellent news about bus travel in the city. All of the city’s bus operators have capped fares at £2 until the end of March – allowing people to go further for less.
Funding for our Bus Service Improvement Plan - or BSIP - is now supporting two new bus fare offers for under 19s, making it more affordable for young people and those with young families to travel on our excellent bus network.
From the end of this month, the BSIP funding will also be supporting additional Sunday services on our 37 and 37B routes, which link the Meadowview and Bristol Estates with the local hospital and the city centre.
These are the first in what will be a host of excellent projects to support cheaper and more reliable bus services in the city.
I was also pleased to see that 100 of our old BikeShare bikes are being donated to a charity that will ship them to Malawi to support communities in the African country. This really is a great demonstration of how we can use circular economy principals in the work we do. This will of course soon be followed by the introduction of a new BikeShare scheme with electric bikes in the spring.
Last year, we conducted a Wilder Verges pilot project to explore how we can use verges to improve biodiversity and create bigger, better, and more joined-up habitats in Brighton & Hove. I’m delighted to report that nearly half of the 25 sites involved saw an increase in types and number of pollinator or downland plant species from the previous year. 70% of the verges recorded a pollinator or downland plant species not seen in 2021. The Wilder Verges report will be published on our website at the end of this month.
We’ll hear in this meeting about the excellent work being done to build an electric vehicle infrastructure in Brighton & Hove, making the city one of the best in the UK for EV charging. In the last year we’ve seen usage of these charge points double and I’m looking forward to hearing more about how we’re going to expand our work in this area.
Unfortunately, we will have to have some tough discussions today. 12 years of government cutbacks have seen £110m wiped off our funding over the next decade. This has left us with a huge budget gap which instead, will have to be filled through further cuts to services – which will be a significant challenge for all of us to overcome.
We are extremely dismayed by the fact that we may not have the funds to keep all of our public toilets open. While decisions on this will be made at budget P&R and budget council – rather than today, we will be discussing one way of plugging that financial gap – through charging. I also plan to write to the Government outlining the problems caused by reductions in our funding which may lead to the closure of some public toilets, and how it will affect people in this cause in our city, requesting from them the funding we need to prevent this.
The reality is that the rising cost and demand for our services is rapidly outstripping the resources we have available. We have a legal responsibility to present a balanced budget – which is why we are being forced to make these difficult decisions. If we cannot do this, the government will intervene and force the closure of most of our non-statutory services.
We’re not alone in this. Local authorities across the country are having facing the same issues and are having to make difficult choices. It is outrageous that in the 5th richest country in the world, local authorities have been forced to close over 20% of their toilets in the past six years. I plan to write to the Government outlining the problems caused by reductions in our funding which may lead to the closure of some public toilets, mentioning the problems this will cause in our city and requesting the funding from them to keep them open.
We will continue to work closely with officers to find more the most palatable savings we can, so that we can continue to work in the best interests of the people of the city”.
62 Call Over
62.1 The following items on the agenda were reserved for discussion:
- Item 66: Fees & Charges 2023/24
- Item 67: Safer, Better Streets- Infrastructure Priority Framework
- Item 68: Electric Vehicle Charge Point Update
- Item 70: Elm Grove Parking Proposals
- Item 75: Car Parking in the City’s Parks
- Item 76: Playground Refurbishment Update
- Item 77: Public Toilets
62.2 The Democratic Services Officer confirmed that the items listed above had been reserved for discussion and that the following reports on the agenda with the recommendations therein had been approved and adopted:
- Item 69: Parking Annual Report 2021-22
- Item 71: Parking Scheme Update report
- Item 72: Strategic Risk Progress Update
- Item 73: Transport for the South East’s Strategic Investment Plan
- Item 74: Highway Asset Management Policy and Strategy
63 Public Involvement
(B) Public Questions
(1) Smoke Control Areas
60.1 Adrian Hill read the following question:
“14% of the city suffer asthma. Between 1/3 and half of all childhood asthma is caused by poor air quality (Bradford & Barcelona studies). Air pollution also causes heart disease, COPD, lung cancer, low birth weight, premature birth, dementia, organ damage and developmental problems. 38% of particulate emissions (UK) are from solid fuel burning (DEFRA). Particulate pollution increased in Preston Park the last three years (AQASR). A Labour Group amendment was submitted to the recent AQAP delaying a SCA extension and denying residents protection against the worst solid fuel pollution offences; will research into SCA extension be made a priority?”
60.2 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question Adrian. We are pleased that the overall Air Quality Action Plan was approved by the committee last year and provides an indication of the many priorities that the council will want to progress over the next 5 years. These include the introduction of a citywide Smoke Control Area for the city to help address the impacts of visible smoke from building chimneys. Tackling all sources of pollution to minimise their impacts on people’s health is important and we know that domestic burning can contribute to around 25% of national particulate emissions, and just over 15% is due to wood burning. New legislation now bans the sale of the most polluting solid fuels throughout England, including traditional house coal and wet wood.
We were disappointed that at the last committee amended the report so that we couldn’t prioritise smoke control areas officer guidance that the relevant evidence had been gathered. I can assure you that this is being looked at again and officers will be briefing me on this.
Getting the right messages out to people about smoke and air quality is really vital as well, and further updates will be made to the council’s website. This work is being undertaken alongside some of the other important actions that are included in the plan such as real-time monitoring and awareness raising, which I know you are also supportive of”.
(2) Public Toilets
60.3 Joy Robinson read the following question:
“Over the Christmas holidays a number of toilets along the seafront were closed causing discomfort to visitors and residents alike.
I am a resident of Second Avenue and see a notice is posted by the toilets close to the Lawns Cafe, stating they are closed from 28th November until further notice. Can the Chair please advise if the toilets will re-open at all in the next 6 months and an approximate opening date. Can the Chair please advise what alternative provision is being out in place”.
60.4 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question. The reason the toilets near the Hove Lawns café are currently closed is because they are being refurbished. Alternative provision is available at the King Alfred toilets.
The council is facing some really difficult decisions to agree a balanced budget for next year which may impact on public toilet provision. There is a report on today’s agenda which sets out which sites will be open and which will be closed from 1 April, depending on budget available to clean and maintain the toilets. The council’s 54 councillors will meet in February to set the council budget, including the public toilet budget”.
60.5 Joy Robinson put the following supplementary question:
“Surely the council saw the closure problem coming - why doesn't the Green administration have a better plan in place to save our public toilets that are valued so much by local community and the tourists who are essential to our local community?”
60.6 The Chair provided the following response in writing:
“It is with heavy hearts that we are currently having to consider the closure of some public toilets in the city. The council is grappling with a budget gap for 2023/24 in excess of £20m following a decade of huge funding cuts from central government meaning that the council has had to make cuts of more than £110m. Over the past 10 years the council has managed to preserve our public toilets when many other Local Authorities have had to close them in light of central government cuts.
We are now at the stage where we are having to review the provision of all non-statutory services in order to set a balanced budget for 2023/24 which is a legal obligation of the council. We only received notification from central government as to the financial settlement on 19th December 2023/24 and this announcement indicated that we would have an even greater budget deficit than we had anticipated. We are therefore having to look at cuts in service areas that we had intended to try to preserve.
We understand the importance of public toilets for residents and visitors and some toilets in the higher footfall areas of the city will remain open. However without enough funding we will not be able to keep all 36 toilets open.
For toilets that are closed we will work with community groups and other stakeholders to try to find ways to bring them back into operation”.
(3) Bus Service in Ovingdean
60.7 Anna Webb read the following question:
“Ovingdean is frequently let down by buses; eg. at least twice in the last 2 days, the bus did not arrive. We only have one bus service and it is too infrequent to be reliable; the route sometimes goes to the marina, but not always; it sometimes goes to/from the station, but not always; we can only travel west, except on Sundays and it stops far too early to allow people to get home after an evening out.
With hundreds of new homes being built here, what are the council’s plans to improve the bus services to Ovingdean?”
60.8 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are aware that the council contracted operator for service 52 has faced exceptional challenges recently, related to staffing and vehicle availability, however we understand that these are now largely resolved.
The council’s public transport team is always keen to be made aware of any specific problems on any council supported bus service, so these can be investigated. Should there ever be any issues in the future, then we advise to take note of the location, date and time of the issue to the service, so officers can fully investigate directly with the operator.
There is a travel plan in place for the Ovingdean Road housing development, and we’ve asked for Bus Service improvements like Bus Shelters, and relocating Bus Stops at locations to make them more user-friendly, to encourage modal shift; and ensure viability of the bus services in the area in the longer term which would increase potential demand for buses. With this in mind & subject to resources, it is hoped to introduce later Monday to Saturday evening journeys on service 52 in the spring, funded by the government’s Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP)”.
60.9 Anna Webb put the following supplementary question:
“How does the limited service provision fit with the council’s own policy of encouraging people out of their cars, for example the move to change initative?”
60.10 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are looking at ways to improve the service as outlined in my response”.
(4) ULEZ
60.11 On behalf of Daniel Roberts, Adrian Hill read the following question:
“We were pleased to hear the Council’s commitment to targeting improved clean air in our city. I crucial part of the plan for this was an extended ULEZ zone. I wanted to enquire when the plans for this would be actioned upon?”
60.12 The Chair provided the following reply:
“A review of the requirements needed to progress the development of an expanded Ultra Low Emission Zone (or ULEZ) has indicated that computer-based modelling will help understand the likely impacts of various options. An allocation of funding to develop a citywide transport model has been agreed and a tendering process for this work is planned to begin soon. This will then enable officers to further assess the timescale associated with developing a proportional approach to developing the ULEZ and bringing it forward as soon as possible.
In the meantime, funding has also been allocated to enable the installation of camera technology around or on entry to Air Quality Management Areas to provide baseline and ongoing data collection about vehicle flows and emission categories of vehicles for the ULEZ”.
60.13 Adrian Hill asked the following supplementary question:
“When will the work be completed by?”
60.14 The Chair provided the following reply:
“I do not have the information to hand and can send it in writing”.
(5) Multi Storey Car Parks
60.15 Carolyn Lewis read the following question:
“Instead of attempting to redirect the traffic in Hanover; might BHCC’s ETSC/central budget allocation not be better directed towards repurposing the city’s multi-storey car parks as housing stock? If not, why not as this would surely reduce traffic emissions as well as providing homes and resident consumers?”
60.16 The Chair provided the following reply:
“This committee has agreed to progress the liveable neighbourhood scheme in Hanover and Tarner to the consultation and redesign stage, and is working towards delivering a pilot, subject to committee approval. The scheme fits with the council’s commitment to decarbonise transport by improving public space for walking, wheeling and cycling. The cost of a large housing project would be a lot higher than that of a liveable neighbourhood pilot – and funding for transport and housing projects come from different pots.
Repurposing the City’s multi-storey car parks as housing stock would have a significant impact on traffic management and increased pressure within on-street spaces which would struggle to cope with the demand. This would particularly affect residents who use their permits in shared spaces between paid parking and resident permits and cause a lot of frustration to visitors to the City when trying to find available parking spaces.
It’s also important to note that not all the car parks in the City Centre are owned by the Council. This approach would have a significant impact on the budget allocation and income after the short-term sale price”.
(6) Car use
60.17 Jenni Grey read the following question:
“One of the reasons given for introducing the LTN is to make people more active. But many people who live in Hanover do so because of its proximity to the city and the seafront, and they can walk to the many amenities they offer. As your approach is to make it less viable for people to use their cars, how can you be sure that the LTN will actually make people more active, or whether it could have the reverse effect and mean that people just end up staying in more, or using taxis for short journeys?”
60.18 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question Jenni. In line with one of the city’s Climate Assembly’s top recommendations, we want to bring forward projects that help create ‘healthier low traffic/pedestrianised communities’. The Hanover and Tarner Liveable Neighbourhood is one example and would be the city’s first pilot project of this type. As you have noted, one of the objectives of making an area more liveable is to increase active travel. This can be achieved by reducing the number and impact of vehicles in an area and creating a safer and more attractive, outdoor space for residents to enjoy, and socialise or move about in. More walking and cycling trips, especially as an alternative to the car for some journeys that start in the area, will also improve people’s physical and mental health – something that benefits everybody.
We know that these proposals would be a first for the city and therefore we need to be able to understand and explain what changes occur as a result. A monitoring framework for the project was agreed by this committee in June last year, and a number of questions were asked about travel patterns as part of the consultation that took place over the summer. The responses to these questions will then enable us to gauge changes in people’s travel choices over time”.
60.19 Jennie Grey asked the following supplementary question:
“From what you’ve said you don’t really know how many journeys residents make by car could reasonable be done by foot or by bike. If you haven’t done research into why people use their cars, how do you know you’re not just wasting money on a scheme that has been called a complex solution to a problem that does not exist?”
60.20 The Chair provided the following reply:
“As I mentioned in my answer before, this is a trial. We’re using an ETRO to do something temporary to test the idea of whether we can reduce the number of cars and improve the space in Hanover & Tarner. In other areas it has been very successful so we want to try that here. As I said before, it was number three of the Climate Assemblies top recommendations so we are looking at a framework today which we are going to consider”.
(7) Bus Stop
60.21 John Warmington read the following question:
“Given reports that Phase 3 of the Valley Gardens scheme is proposed to start work in the spring, is the Council going to make sure that the northbound bus stop in Marlborough Place near the "King & Queen" is reinstated before work starts? This was intended to have been done as part of the earlier stages, and it is essential to have the bus stop in place before anything is done to remove the stops outside the Royal Pavilion”.
60.22 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are aware of requests for a stop in this location. I should clarify that no stop is suspended as there has not been one at this location since the previous bus lanes were installed in the 1990s. However, the changes to the road layout do make this possible and kerbs have been installed for a stop close to Church Street as part of the Valley Gardens project.
Bus operators are however waiting for designs for stops as part of Phase 3 of the scheme (the section between the Royal Pavilion and the Aquarium) to be finalised and implemented before confirming future stopping arrangements.
It would be possible for operators to start using this as a stop in theory; however, unfortunately it is not as straight forward as we would like because of the timetabling implications for buses. This is ultimately a decision for operators as the council is not able to compel commercial operators to run certain services or stopping patterns. We understand the benefit a stop in this location could have, and we hope this can be resolved in future”.
60.23 John Warmington asked the following supplementary question:
“Are those plans you have talked about be in place before construction?”
60.24 The Chair provided the following reply:
“As I said in my response, the operators themselves are the ones who have to make that decision, unfortunately”.
(C) Deputations
(1) Our Tree
60.25 The Committee considered a deputation requesting the committee investigate the undertaking of planting/re-planting of trees on Sudeley Terrace and Upper Sudeley Street and report their findings.
60.26 The Chair provided the following response:
“It is a real shame to have to remove any of our trees and the council only ever does so for good reason. The tree in question was felled following a failed safety inspection in November 2020. It posed an unacceptable risk to the Highway and the public.
Regrettably the council cannot immediately replace felled street trees as a replacement is dependent on available funding and resources at any given time. Tree stumps remain in situ until trees can be replaced.
The initial plan for replacing this tree was deemed unviable following consideration of underground services, disabled parking bays and visibility issues highlighted through a Highways safety audit.
As such, the planting design and siting of the replacement tree is being revised.
I am afraid that, at this point, I cannot give a timeframe for the completion. Officers hope a viable solution can be agreed during this winter planting season; however this is not possible to guarantee. Please be assured that we will move this forward as quickly as possible”.
60.27 Councillor Platts moved a motion to request an officer report on the matter.
60.28 Councillor Wilkinson formally seconded the motion.
60.29 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
60.30 Resolved- That the committee receive an officer report responding to the deputation.
(2) Climate Assembly
60.31 The Committee considered a deputation that contended that the council were introducing highways and traffic measures which are at odds with the plans and requirements laid out within the Climate Assembly Report.
60.32 The Chair provided the following response:
Thank you for your deputation. The Climate Assembly process was a first for the city and Its recommendations and priorities have helped shape what we are focusing on transport and travel and how we do things.
You have referred to some of them in your deputation, and we are working to:-
- implement measures to reduce the impacts of vehicles in the Old Town and Lanes area of the city centre to make it more ‘liveable’, and more plans will be developed through engagement and consultation;
- create a healthier community and safer environment for active travel through our plans for the first pilot Liveable Neighbourhood in the Hanover and Tarner area; and
- improve public transport as an alternative to the car for some journeys in the city. To support this, our Bus Service Improvement Plan has been successful in securing nearly £30 million pounds of funding to improve services and infrastructure for passengers. It has been prepared in partnership with the city’s bus operators.
We are also ‘prioritising cyclists and creating a well-designed, dedicated cycling network’ and have approved a 10-year strategic plan for cycling and walking infrastructure, and are developing and delivering a number of schemes on key routes.
You have also highlighted a number of specific points within the report about the Climate Assembly’s work and outlined your concerns about our approach to these. Taking each in turn, I can confirm the following:-
Air quality is an important consideration alongside carbon reduction. Our School Streets programme aims to create a safer environment that enables and encourages more active and sustainable travel. Restrictions to traffic in adjacent roads can reduce vehicle emissions and therefore improve air quality levels outside schools. Where monitoring is considered necessary, this will be carried out, although there is limited research data available due to the short-term nature of the closures and the complexity of air quality data collection. However, officers are aware of national studies that have begun to capture air quality improvements as a result of School Streets schemes.
Engagement and consultation are a crucial part of raising awareness of the challenges that we face with the climate and biodiversity emergency, and explaining why changes are needed and the positive actions that people can take. The feedback that we receive helps inform and shape proposals. We will always take account of everybody’s views but when a large consultation is taking place, feedback cannot always be provided directly to an individual or groups. Consultation results will be published, and changes to scheme designs as a result of consultation and engagement with residents and stakeholders are explained.
We need to try and balance everybody’s needs when designing a scheme, but this is not always easy or possible sometimes. Officers frequently engage with representatives of various stakeholder organisations to ensure appropriate consideration is given to all road users. Equality Impact Assessments for projects or programmes of work are part of the council’s legal duty and help to identify and mitigate potential impacts on certain groups, such as people with disabilities. This would include exemptions for access, if not already included. If there are any specific schemes where you believe due consideration has not been given to this, then please let us know.
We often need to work quickly, but not at the expense of following proper processes, such as consultation, or considering alternatives. Not all changes involve formal consultation as some measures are necessary but temporary; to enable roadworks to take place and be managed, for example. There are powers within the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 that allow councils to do this. This was the case for the Western Road improvement scheme. It is a long and busy road in the middle of the city centre and managing such a large project involves some complex and difficult issues, such as the Upper North Street diversion. A number of alternatives were considered by officers and have been explained to residents, and these are available for everyone to see on the project website.
Officers will do all they can to reach a balanced view on designs and construction plans, while ensuring that the council complies with its legal requirements. To deliver a number of schemes that are consistent with the Climate Assembly’s priorities, we will continue to engage and consult to get the best outcome. We acknowledge and expect that there will unfortunately be some disruption as the city is so busy, but we will continue to communicate with residents who are affected and do what we can to alleviate concerns that are raised”.
60.33 Resolved- That the committee note the deputation.
(3) Cycle Storage at Preston Park Velodrome
60.34 The Committee considered a deputation requesting storage facilities at Preston Park Velodrome.
60.35 The Chair provided the following response:
“I think the Brighton Multicultural Women’s Cycle Club is fantastic and I really appreciate the difference that you are making.
Unfortunately, Cityparks are not currently agreeing to any more shipping containers to be placed in parks due to the wider impact on the loss of space, the anti-social behaviour that can arise as a result of them and the detrimental impact on the aesthetic of our parks. Preston Park is a heritage park with Green Flag status and the council is striving to preserve our open spaces and the heritage aspects of our parks.
City Parks allowed several groups in the past to put steel shipping containers in parks to store equipment and some groups have put containers in parks without authorisation.
There are other groups who would like to put shipping containers in parks, including some who provide a great public service such as yours.
As this is not the only container the council is being asked about, a consistent approach is needed. The good news is that Cityparks are recruiting a premises manager to develop a strategy for buildings in parks. As part of this they will audit all of the buildings and spaces in parks; develop a maintenance and investment plan and ensure that we make best use of the space. This strategy will include the development of a policy in relation to new development in parks and storage for community groups. The aim is to bring this strategy and policy to committee this year.
I can’t pre-empt that work by suggesting that this storage container will get the go-ahead but as an administration we would really like to support the Brighton Multicultural Women’s Cycle Club. You would also need to be aware that if a new container or structure is agreed you would also need to apply for planning permission and a decision would be made taking council planning policy into account”.
60.36 Resolved- That the Committee note the deputation.
64 Items referred from Council
(a) Petitions
(1) Falmer Pond
64.1 The Committee considered a petition referred from Full Council requesting increased maintenance of Falmer Pond.
64.2 The Chair provided the following response:
“I am pleased to let you know that the council has secured Phase 1 National Heritage Lottery Funding as part of the ‘Downs to the Sea’ partnership led by the South Downs National Park.
This funding is to employ a consultant to carry out the necessary survey work and submit a phase 2 bid to fully restore Falmer Pond. The partnership project is aiming to submit the overall Phase 2 application by late 2023 or early 2024 and it is hoped that if the bid is successful, work will begin on restoring the pond early to mid-2024. These dates are subject to change.
The South Downs National Park have a press release regarding the partnership project that this bid is part of. It is on their website and I can ask Democratic Services to circulate the link with the minutes”.
64.3 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
(2) Petition for two new pedestrian crossings in Woodingdean
64.4 The Committee considered a petition referred from Full Council requesting two new pedestrian crossings on Falmer Road and Bexhill Road.
64.5 The Chair provided the following response:
“The location of Bexhill Road by the skate park was assessed via the pedestrian crossing priority list in 2022 and the outcome reported to ETS committee in November 2022; the initial assessment found this location was below the threshold to progress to the second stage of assessment for a pedestrian crossing.
This location was also assessed in 2013/14 and failed to meet the required threshold. This location can be referred to Safer, Better Streets programme for assessment if approved later in the committee meeting.
Falmer Road was the subject of a stakeholder engagement meeting held in July 2021. A design was proposed for a crossing facility however this was not progressed due to the physical constraints in the area preventing preferred design option. It was therefore agreed to keep a watching brief on this location. This location is due to be assessed in the coming weeks via the Pedestrian Crossing Priority programme, this location can also subsequently referred to the Safer, Better Streets programme for assessment if approved later in the committee meeting”.
64.6 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
65 Member Involvement
(a) Petitions
(1) Road Safety on Fox Way, North Portslade- Councillor Atkinson
65.1 The Committee considered a petition requesting road safety improvements on Fox Way, North Portslade.
65.2 The Chair provided the following response:
“Thank you, Councillor Atkinson, for presenting the petition. There is a report to this committee later in the agenda which outlines how officers will identify high risk sites for road traffic collisions.
To date, Fox Way has not been identified as a high risk site based on collisions reported to the police, although I am aware that there was sadly a fatality last year.
The report also proposes a process for assessing and prioritising the many requests this committee receives for improvements at locations not identified as high risk sites, such as this one. If the framework in the report is approved, I have asked that officers consider Fox Way through that process”.
65.3 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
(b) Written Questions
(1) Pavements on Rottingdean High Street
“The pavements on Rottingdean High Street need refurbishing as they are slippery and uneven. In addition, in some places the pavement is almost the same level as the road which makes people feel unsafe and unprotected from traffic. Please would BHCC inspect the pavements and produce a plan and estimated budget in preparation for the Government’s next round of funding for active travel”
“The brick paving on Rottingdean High Street is the same as in many areas of central Brighton and other places across the country.
Many people value them highly for their appearance, particularly within conservation areas.
We do not consider them to be inherently unsafe and would not seek to replace them on those grounds.
Rottingdean Parish Council has previously asked us to source a quote for alternative bricks for the location near to the crossroads. We passed this quote on to them some time ago.
Any decision over whether to proceed with changing the bricks would be a matter for Brighton and Hove City Council in conjunction with the Parish Council.
DfT funding for active travel schemes is unlikely to be awarded to a scheme that replaces existing materials without making substantial changes to the layout of a road for the benefit of active travel and therefore an alternative funding source would need to be identified”.
(2) Valley Gardens Phase 3
“When will work start on Valley Gardens stage 3, how long will it last, will buses and other motor traffic be diverted and what is the estimated cost estimate for the project?”
“We are currently sourcing a Contractor for the main works and plan on starting works in Spring 2023. We anticipate that works will last about 80 weeks using different phases which could involve diversion of buses and other motor traffic although we plan to keep disruption to a minimum. The current budget for the scheme is £12.838m which is currently being reviewed”
“Do you think that bike lanes are more important to the people of our city than public toilets?”
(3) Bike Stands
“How much will it cost to install the proposed bike stands in Saltdean Oval Park and in Rottingdean? Please would you break down figures by area”
“City Parks estimate that Saltdean could accommodate two cycle stands in five locations costing around £2,000 for each site, as a new concrete base is likely to be needed. The total cost is therefore around £10,000 for Saltdean.
At Rottingdean only one location has been identified for three cycle stands estimated to cost around £3,000.
Please note, these costs are an estimate. City Parks will need to undertake a competitive tender for each site to establish a more accurate cost, but the above figures provide a general guide”.
“As we already have plenty of railings to lock our bike to in these parks, please would you divert the money allocated to keeping the public toilets open?”
(4) Democracy on ETS
“Will the Co-Chairs explain why they are undermining democracy and transparency on ETS by refusing to answer more than one written question at ETS meetings and refusing to answer other questions in writing (all of which met the rules of the Council’s constitution) and instead referring them back to Council Officers?”
“Before outlining the rules we have adopted as Co-Chairs and why, I first address to correct a couple of points raised in your question.
Member questions may be answered at the meeting, or at the discretion of the chair, by way of a written response circulated after the meeting. To enable the committee’s business to be carried out efficiently and to provide time for public representations, each Group is permitted three questions per committee meeting. Both myself and Cllr Davis - and Cllr Heley before me - have answered those written questions in the committee meeting. So three written question from member and not one. Indeed, you have asked three questions at this meeting Cllr Platts. The rules on Member questions was communicated to all of the committee in June 2022 so this is not a new approach.
All questions are responded to in writing, whether they are answered at the committee meeting or otherwise. The written responses to all ten questions you submitted to the previous committee were responded to within four working days. The only circumstances in which questions are referred to council officers is where the response requires technical or highly detailed information.
In the previous six months, so only four committees, ETS has received 75 questions just from Members, which is on average 19 per meeting. Each Member question takes typically 5 minutes to ask and respond to. If all of the Member questions were to be answered at every meeting, we would spend over an hour and half every meeting just on this one item.
Our duty as Co-Chairs is to ensure that there is challenge and accountability from Members and the public alike but also that the meeting operates efficiently. The committee must focus fully on the many key proposals set out within the main agenda, all of which involve major changes to the city.
We feel that permitting three questions per Group to be put at the meeting - plus providing written responses to all other written questions received - ensures the most important business of the committee is given priority. There is also scope for Members to submit petitions, letters and Notices of Motion for the ETS agenda. And of course, the committee continues to receive and welcome representations from residents to every meeting and we have had a high number of these today.
“Would the Co-Chairs prefer us to encourage residents to come and bring their questions on person rather than through their local councillors?”
“I think what I’ve just outlined is that obviously we still want to respond to things and there is a method by which the public can come to the committee and raise their questions. We will respond to all of your questions, and they may not all be asked at committee but there will still be a response. I can just say that yes, we do want people to bring their questions and they will get a response to them”.
(5) Graffiti on business properties
“What financial support can be provided to local businesses across the City, particularly independents, who are struggling to afford the cost of repeatedly cleaning graffiti off their properties and may not be able to afford CCTV? Please note that the previous answer given at the last ETS meeting gave no indication of what financial help might be available which could become a huge burden to small businesses”
“There is no direct financial support the council can provide.
The advice provided previously, such as; regular maintenance, avoiding block coloured walls, installing security cameras, improve lighting, commissioning a mural, quick removal of graffiti or the use of anti-graffiti laminate coating can help businesses reduce costs associated with graffiti on their property.
Since we started the Targeted Action Zone approach in September 2022, there has been a positive effect on the completed roads. The amount of tagging on those roads has reduced and businesses are trying to stay on top of the maintenance of their property”.
“What will happen to small businesses that can’t continue to pay to remove graffiti from their property, will the council fine them”?
65.21 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We don’t have any financial support we can offer. We can go in and advise businesses on how to avoid it and steps they can take. If a business was struggling, we would take every case on its own merits and consider the specific circumstances. So, we would use out discretion but ultimately, all businesses are responsible for removing their graffiti and this was a policy that was considered at this committee and made at committee. But we do use our discretion”.
(6) Graffiti on council properties
65.22 Councillor Platts read the following question:
“What action is the Council taking to clean graffiti from its own properties and street furniture across the City?”
65.23 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Through the introduction of Targeted Action Zones, Cityclean is focusing on the given area for a two-week period, removing graffiti from publicly owned bins, benches and street signs.
Offensive graffiti from both council property and non-council property is removed within 24 hours.
The target for removing non-offensive graffiti from council property is five days from the date of the report.
In recent months, there has been a concerted effort to remove graffiti from communal bins. However, progress has been hampered by the poor weather”.
(7) Portland Road
65.24 Councillor Nemeth read the following question:
“What have the delays been to date in implementing the Committee’s agreement to implement a speed limit of 20mph on Portland Road in Hove?”
65.25 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question. I am aware this is one of a number requests for safety-related measures. The Better Safer Streets report item on today’s agenda sets out a framework for assessing and prioritising requests like this and the local members support for lower speeds on this busy road are very welcome”.
(8) Bins
65.26 Councillor Nemeth read the following question:
“Will the Chair back calls for an extension, especially to the west, of the Council’s T-zone to prevent private bins being kept on the public highway?”
65.27 The Chair provided the following reply:
“I’m really pleased with the introduction of time-banding zones. Not only has it improved and tidied up central areas of the city, it has also improved the accessibility of our pavements and roads.
I absolutely support the extension of the scheme. I will ask officers to take the necessary action to extend to other areas of the city and bring any recommendations to committee as necessary.
I know many of us received feedback on the process last time, so I’ll ensure we learn lessons from the first stage and build into the next phase”.
The following questions, listed in the agenda were responded to in writing as follows:
Public toilets and outdoor fitness- Councillor Platts
We absolutely encourage outdoor fitness and will continue to do so and we are aware of concerns about the impact of toilet closures on outdoor fitness, particularly on Park Run. However, we’re facing a funding shortfall of more than £20m for next year.
We know how important toilets are for so many visitors and residents. This is why we have worked very hard to keep most of the city’s public toilets open over a time of austerity – when many across the country have been closed.
But our budget challenges mean it’s no longer an option to simply trim service budgets. The days when we can rely on endlessly cutting back services but essentially keep them open are unfortunately over.
The council is taking a responsible approach to working with the money we have available.
This means making very difficult decisions about cuts across each and every council service. We have no choice but to make savings on the public toilet budget and to focus resources on keeping the toilets in the busiest areas clean and safe for residents and visitors.
One of the recommendations later is to introduce charging to help sustain public toilet provision. The income generated will enable us to keep some toilets open. Given the financial challenges ahead of us, if we don’t press on with this now, there is a risk that more toilets may face closure if further savings are required.
The team are also looking at alternative options to enable public toilets to stay open without council funds which will, hopefully, result in some facilities being reopened and sustained. This can be a lengthy process and must be considered a medium to long term solution.
As you highlight in your question, maintaining the facility has been challenging and has led, on occasions, to a lack of toilet roll and soap. We’ve struggled to get staff and the recruitment agency has also not been able to provide staff to provide cover for council staff when there have been absences. Sadly, this has resulted in some of the poor experiences you refer to.
Given the limited resources available, these need to be used to ensure that the sites remaining open are maintained to a standard that is meets basic hygiene requirements. If more toilets are opened, this will be compromised.
The council remains fully committed to keeping as many sites open within the allocated budget whilst being able to ensure minimum cleaning standards are achieved, and public safety is prioritised.
Recommendations on public toilets will form part of the budget setting process that all Councillors will decide upon in February.
Double Yellow Lines- Councillor Platts
The team has been focusing on getting Sheepcote Valley Way resurfaced, which I’m pleased to say will start on 10th February (weather permitting).
East Brighton Park is covered under a TRO. In effect, this means that all areas that are not marked as parking bays are treated by civil enforcement officers as double yellow lines.
However, up until now, this has been a challenge due to the poor condition of the road.
The resurfaced road will need relining and so presents an opportune moment to paint double yellow lines as well. At the moment, we don’t have a confirmed date for when the painting will be completed, but I can let you know once a date has been agreed.
Glass Recycling- Councillor Platts
The communal bin improvement trial in Brunswick and Adelaide and Regency wards is underway.
As I’m sure you can appreciate, it is a large and complex project which is seeking to place waste streams together to make it easier for residents to dispose of their waste.
Although a significant amount of work has already taken place, there are a number of tasks which make providing a timescale difficult. The start of the trial is reliant on procuring a high number of containers, which relies on global markets which remain uncertain. There are also consultation processes to follow, including Traffic Regulation Orders and with staff.
Falmer Road- Councillor Fishleigh
The southern section of Falmer Road is on the carriageway programme for improvements in 2023/24. Ward Councillors will be notified as soon as the works have been planned and the start date agreed.
Greenways in Ovingdean- Councillor Fishleigh
An engineer visited the area in June following the original request and an officer has been in touch this month to further discuss the location. As per previous correspondence on this matter, there are currently no suitable budgets available to create new footways in the city and so any works would require additional suitable funding to be identified. However, an engineer is working on an updated cost which will be shared with you for information in due course.
(d) Notices of Motion
(1) Boundary Road/Station Road improvements
65.28 Councillor Nemeth moved a Notice of Motion relating to proposed improvements to Boundary Road and Station Road.
65.29 Councillor Simson formally seconded the motion.
65.30 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
65.31 Resolved- This Committee:
1) Calls on Officers to bring forward an Officer Report detailing plans for the long-awaited public realm improvements to Boundary Road and Station Road.
(2) Cycle Hangars
65.32 Councillor Nemeth moved a Notice of Motion referred from Full Council relating to the installation of cycle hangars in the city.
65.33 Councillor Simson formally seconded the motion.
65.34 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
65.35 Resolved-
This Council:
1. Notes unfavourable national press coverage of the roll-out of the Council’s cycle hangar scheme
2. Expresses concern over the use of the Budget process, rather than a standard Officer Report at Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee, to implement the scheme; thereby avoiding scrutiny of financial, legal and equality issues and numerous other related matters;
3. Expresses concern at reports from residents that workers who installed the cycle hangars were advised by council staff to “call the police immediately if there was any trouble” in response to residents politely sharing concerns;
4. Notes the lack of consultation that has taken place with residents over hangar locations; and
Therefore, resolves to:
5. Calls for an Officer Report detailing all elements of the cycle hangar scheme, to include details of the exact criteria used to accept or decline cycle hangar placements
66 Fees and Charges 2023-24
66.1 The Committee considered a joint report of the Executive Director for Housing, Neighbourhoods, & Communities; Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture; Executive Director of Adult Social Care & Health that set out the proposed 2023/24 fees and charges for the service areas covered by the Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee in accordance with corporate regulations and policy.
66.2 Councillors Nemeth, Simson, Appich, Lloyd and Wilkinson asked questions and contributed to the debate of the report.
66.3 The Chair put the recommendations to the vote that failed.
67 Safer, Better Streets - Infrastructure Priority Framework
67.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that proposed the Safer, Better Streets – Highway Improvement Prioritisation Framework which provides a process to assess concerns creating a barriers for safe movement of pedestrians and cyclists. This process would enable officers to consider and prioritise improvements such as pedestrian crossings, traffic calming, speed reduction measures, modal filters and Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) infrastructure.
67.2 Councillor Wilkinson moved a motion to amend the recommendations and struckthrough and in bold italics below:
2.1 That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee approves the Safer, Better Streets – Highway Improvement Prioritisation Framework and grants permission to commence the assessment of outstanding concerns, listed in Appendix 1.
2.2 That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee requests a review of the criteria listed to consider other metrics over and above the assessments outlined in the pre-qualification criteria outlined in Appendix 2, to ensure issues such as midnight ‘joyriders’ or regular non-peak time speeding are not overlooked, and report back on this review for committee approval.
2.23 That the Environment Transport &
Sustainability Committee notes that future concerns will be
assessed under this framework and priority locations will be
reported quarterly annually at
Committee to enable swift action if any new schemes highlight
unintended accident spots, for
example.
Priority improvement measures will be recommended at Committee and
implemented, subject to available funding, through the LTP’s
capital programme or external funding streams.
2.4 That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee agrees that in clarification of paragraph 4.5 of this report, officers will still consider requests from members of the public following petitions and deputations to committee, if committee members vote to refer said requests from petitions/deputations to the framework.
67.3 Councillor Platts formally seconded the motion.
67.4 Councillors Heley, Simson, Platts, Nemeth and Wilkinson asked questions and contributed to the debate of the report.
67.5 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
67.6 The Chair put the recommendations as amended to the vote that were approved.
67.7 Resolved-
1) That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee approves the Safer, Better Streets – Highway Improvement Prioritisation Framework and grants permission to commence the assessment of outstanding concerns, listed in Appendix 1.
2) That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee requests a review of the criteria listed to consider other metrics over and above the assessments outlined in the pre-qualification criteria outlined in Appendix 2, to ensure issues such as midnight ‘joyriders’ or regular non-peak time speeding are not overlooked, and report back on this review for committee approval.
3) That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee notes that future concerns will be assessed under this framework and priority locations will be reported every six months at Committee to enable swift action if any new schemes highlight unintended accident spots, for example. Priority improvement measures will be recommended at Committee and implemented, subject to available funding, through the LTP’s capital programme or external funding streams.
4) That the Environment Transport & Sustainability Committee agrees that in clarification of paragraph 4.5 of this report, officers will still consider requests from members of the public following petitions and deputations to committee, if committee members vote to refer said requests from petitions/deputations to the framework.
68 Electric vehicle charge point update
68.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that updated Committee on progress in expanding the electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and successful new bids for funding. It also sought permission to procure additional electric vehicle charge points under a non-exclusive concession contract, divided into three lots in line with the recommended option agreed at the Procurement Advisory Board.
68.2 Councillor Platts moved a motion to amend the recommendations as shown in bold italics below:
2.1 That Committee notes the
submission of further successful bids for funding for electric
vehicle charge points from central government and progress in
expanding the charging network as well as the growth in demand and
charging activity.
2.2 That Committee delegates
authority to the Executive Director for Economy Environment and
Culture to take all steps necessary to procure and award a new
concession contract –
following a briefing to the Procurement Advisory Board before the
specification and award criteria are finalised to enable members to
comment on the proposed approach –subdivided into three lots for the supply,
installation, maintenance and operation of electric vehicle charge
points for a term of ten years, and requests annual reports back to this committee
on progress in expanding the electric vehicle charging
infrastructure.
2.3 That Committee delegates authority to the Executive Director for Economy Environment and Culture to approve an extension to the contract referred to in 2.2 above for a period of up to five years following the initial ten-year term, subject to satisfactory performance by the concessionaire(s) and following a briefing to the Procurement Advisory Board.
68.3 Councillor Wilkinson formally seconded the motion.
68.4 Councillors Platts, Simson and West asked questions and contributed to the debate of the report.
68.5 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
68.6 The Chair put the recommendations as amended to the vote that were agreed.
68.7 Resolved-
1) That Committee notes the submission of further successful bids for funding for electric vehicle charge points from central government and progress in expanding the charging network as well as the growth in demand and charging activity.
2) That Committee delegates authority to the Executive Director for Economy Environment and Culture to take all steps necessary to procure and award a new concession contract – following a briefing to the Procurement Advisory Board before the specification and award criteria are finalised to enable members to comment on the proposed approach – subdivided into three lots for the supply, installation, maintenance and operation of electric vehicle charge points for a term of ten years, and requests annual reports back to this committee on progress in expanding the electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
3) That Committee delegates authority to the Executive Director for Economy Environment and Culture to approve an extension to the contract referred to in 2.2 above for a period of up to five years following the initial ten-year term, subject to satisfactory performance by the concessionaire(s) and following a briefing to the Procurement Advisory Board.
69 Parking Annual Report 2021-22
Resolved-
1) That Committee endorses the publication of the Parking Annual Report for 2021/22 under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004
2) That Committee authorises the Head of Parking Services to produce and publish the report, which will be made available on the Council’s website.
70 Elm Grove parking proposals
70.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that responded to the request that officers explore alternative parking provisions for Elm Grove residents and report back to the committee before proceeding directly to the advertisement of a Traffic Regulation Order.
70.2 Councillor Wilkinson moved a motion to add a recommendation as shown in bold italics as follows:
2.2 That Committee requests officers keep the Traffic Regulation Order under review, reporting progress back to this committee and continue to consider alternative forms of parking provision for residents of Elm Grove.
70.3 Councillor Platts formally seconded the motion.
70.4 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
70.5 The Chair put the recommendations as amended to the vote that were agreed.
70.6 Resolved-
1) That Committee agrees to option 4 which is to proceed directly to the advertisement of a Traffic Regulation Order for the Elm Grove Pavement parking ban. This would include reviewing Elm Grove further as part of the Liveable Neighbourhood proposals for the area or at a later date when and if funding is identified.
2) That Committee requests officers keep the Traffic Regulation Order under review, reporting progress back to this committee and continue to consider alternative forms of parking provision for residents of Elm Grove.
71 Parking Scheme Update Report
Resolved-
1) That Committee having taken account of all duly made representations and comments agree that the following Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) are approved to enable the Hallyburton Road area parking Zone 11 to proceed to the implementation stage:
Brighton & Hove Various Controlled Parking Zones Consolidation Order 2018 Amendment Order No.* 202* (TRO-33a-2022)
Brighton & Hove Outer Areas (Waiting, Loading and Parking) and Cycle Lanes Consolidation Order 2018 Amendment Order No.* 202* (TRO-33b-2022)
2) That Committee having taken account the low percentage of responses (11%) and the mixed response to the postcard consultation, agrees that no change should be made to the Hollingdean detailed design consultation boundary.
3) That Committee having taken account of all duly made representations and comments, agrees to proceed to the next stage of advertising a Traffic Regulation Order for the Withdean Road area for a light touch parking scheme Monday to Sunday, 9am to 10am and 1pm to 2pm.
4) That the Committee having taken account of all duly made representations and comments, agrees there will be no change to the days and times of operation in Zone X (South Portslade).
72 Strategic Risk progress update
Resolved-
That the Committee:
1) Note the actions taken (‘Existing Controls’) and actions planned to mitigate Strategic Risk 36, linked to the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee, as outlined in Appendix 1.
2) Provide support and challenge to the Risk Owner (Executive Director – Economy, Environment and Culture) on this risk.
73 Transport for the South East’s Strategic Investment Plan
Resolved-
1) That Committee expresses support for Transport for the South East’s final draft Strategic Investment Plan.
74 Highway Asset Management Policy and Strategy
Resolved-
1) That Committee approve the updated Highway Asset Management Policy and Strategy 2023-2025 which will enable the Council to maintain its DfT Incentive Fund banding and associated Local Transport Plan funding.
2) That Committee notes the need for further investment, including capital funding for preventative maintenance programmes, across all asset groups in order to support active, accessible and sustainable travel throughout the city and to reduce the future burden on the revenue and carbon cost of reactive maintenance including pothole repairs.
75 Car parking in the city's parks
60.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that set out proposals to implement parking charges in car parks located within open spaces across the city.
60.2 Councillors Fowler, Simson, Lloyd, Nemeth, Wilkinson, Heley and Davis asked questions and contributed to the debate of the report.
60.3 The Chair put the recommendations to the vote that failed.
76 Playground Refurbishment Programme Update
76.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that provided an update on the Playground Refurbishment Programme which was agreed in January 2021.
76.2 Councillor Wilkinson moved a motion to add a recommendation as shown in bold italics below:
2.2 That the Committee asks officers to meaningfully re-engage with the SEND Advisory group and/or other stakeholders to ensure regular consultation on disability provision is maintained.
76.3 Councillor Platts formally seconded the motion.
76.4 The Chair put the motion to the vote that passed.
76.5 The Chair put the recommendations as amended to the vote that were agreed.
76.6 Resolved-
1) That the Committee notes the progress of the Playground Refurbishment Programme.
2) That the Committee asks officers to meaningfully re-engage with the SEND Advisory group and/or other stakeholders to ensure regular consultation on disability provision is maintained.
77 Public toilets
77.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that sought approval for the introduction of charging at some sites in the city to sustain as much public toilet provision as possible and reduce the likelihood of closures. The report also provided the committee with an update on current service provision in light of the decision to close some public toilets across the city in response to an increasing budget pressure in-year, the expected service provision from 1 April 2023 in light of the budget pressures experienced in 2022/23 and the proposed £0.300m saving proposed as part of the 2023/24 draft budget savings plus an update on the Public Toilet Refurbishment Programme. The report is also addressed the Public Toilet Notice of Motion agreed, as amended, at the committee at its meeting on 15 November 2022.
77.2 Councillor Nemeth moved a motion to amend the recommendations as shown in bold italics and struckthrough as follows:
2.1 That Committee notes the contents of the report.
2.2 That
Committee does not agrees to the introduction of charging at
public toilets but agrees that
insourcing of the contract for cleaning and maintaining
public toilets has failed and that this is the principal reason for
proposals to close public toilets and to introduce charging
in line with the principles set out in paragraph
3.27
2.3 That Committees agrees that accountability was regularly mentioned as a reason for insourcing (the Leader of the Council specifically said that he preferred to ‘bring public toilets back in-house to ensure we have direct management and better accountability’) and expresses concern as to where accountability now sits;
77.3 Councillor Simson formally seconded the motion.
77.4 Councillors Platts, Lloyd, Appich, Simson, Wilkinson, Davis and Fowler asked questions and contributed to the debate of the report.
77.5 The Chair put the Conservative Group motion to the vote that failed.
77.6 The Chair put the recommendations as per the report to the vote that failed.
78 Items referred for Full Council
77.1 The Committee agreed to refer Item 776: Public Toilets to the next meeting of Full Council for information.
The meeting concluded at 8.50pm