Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 8 June 2023 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 35.

The following questions were received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5) and were put to the Chairman of the Highways and Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Questions asked by Mr. Hunt CC

“Following the development of the County Council’s latest Cycling & Walking Strategy, I note that three particular documents cited in the document are badly in need of updating to meet the Government’s latest guidance (including Gear Change and LTN Infrastructure 20/1).

These are:

·       Leicestershire Highway Design Guide (Interim edition)

·       LCC Rights of Way Improvement Plan (2011-2016)

·       LCC Guidance notes on Development and Public Rights of Way (2011)

Without updating these documents we are frustrating the aims of the Strategy and limiting the powers of Local Planning Authorities in the County.

See:

1.     https://resources.leicestershire.gov.uk/environment-and-planning/planning/leicestershire-highway-design-guide

2.     https://www.leicestershire.gov.uk/sites/default/files/field/pdf/2015/12/8/leics_rowip2.pdf

3.     https://resources.leicestershire.gov.uk/sites/resource/files/field/pdf/faq/2018/6/5/Rights-of-way-guide.pdf

4.     https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/904146/gear-change-a-bold-vision-for-cycling-and-walking.pdf

5.     https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120

1)          When can we expect to see the revised version of these three key policies?

2)          LTP3 (1.4) says “we want to measure what these [School and Workplace Travel Plans] actually deliver – i.e. the actual changes in travel behaviour that result from these travel plans being in place”. Have these travel plans been evaluated in this way and what place do the school and workplace travel plans occupy, if any, in the Loughborough Area CWIS?

3)          What increase in active travel is expected of the Loughborough Area CWIS, assuming the funds become available.

4)          According to the 2011 Census figures drawn from the recommended propensity app, the percentages of journeys to work by cycling or walking in the Loughborough Area are approximately Shepshed 25%, Quorn 20%, Outer Loughborough 31% and Inner Loughborough 52%. (The respective figures for cycling alone are only 3.7%, 3.0%, 6.2% and 7.0%); what are the particular measures to boost the take up in these areas?

5)          The Cycling and Walking Strategy, agreed by the Cabinet, states that Leicestershire County Council is committed to increase levels of active travel in the county and is setting ambitious targets to meet the challenges of improving public health, air quality and congestion and have targets to increase cycling and walking stated in. What are the base lines for these 10 year targets and can they be broken down by area?”

Reply by the Chairman:

“1)    All three documents in question are in the process of being updated or scheduled to progress soon, with expected completion dates as detailed below.

·       The updating of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide (LHDG) is well underway and is expected to be complete by Spring 2024, subject to public consultation feedback.

·       The project to update the Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) is currently expected to begin in September this financial year 2023/24, with the expectation for it to be completed in 2024/25. The RoWIP update project will include several engagement activities seeking views from all key stakeholders to inform its development.

·       The guidance notes on Development and Public Rights of Way (2011) is to be included in the updated LHDG, which is expected to be complete by Spring 2024, subject to public consultation feedback.

2)          At the end of each academic year, the Choose How You Move (CHYM) Schools’ programme is evaluated to understand the impact of the behaviour change measures that have been implemented. In addition, we carry out an annual countywide school travel survey and for this year it will be carried out during October. Workplace and school travel plans are a key part of the Cycling and Walking Strategy and Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plans. There are several actions within the Strategy under the Encouraging and Enabling Theme which contribute towards the development of travel  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

There were no urgent items for consideration.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

Mr. Allen CC declared a non-registrable interest in Agenda Item 8: Update to Petition Response: Request for a School Crossing Outside of St Peters Catholic Primary School, as he had been handling the case on behalf of Dr. Luke Evans MP as a caseworker and had also received correspondence as Borough Councillor.

There were no declarations of the party whip.

The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 35.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport which provided information on the outcome of investigations following the presentation of a petition voicing concerns about road safety outside of St Peters Catholic Primary School in Hinckley. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 8’ is filed with these minutes.

The Chairman welcomed Mr. S. Bray CC and Mr. M. Mullaney CC to the meeting for this item. Comments on the report from Mr. Mullaney had been circulated to Committee Members prior to the commencement of the meeting and a copy is filed with these minutes.

At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr. S. Bray CC raised the following issues on behalf of local residents:

1.     Residents were pleased that the 24 hour assessment period had been undertaken in good weather during the school term but felt that it did not show a complete picture, for example, on a Monday there were a lot of school trips such as, swimming which may have given a different result.

2.     For the full data to be published from the survey.

3.     Residents wished the Committee to note that, when discussing accident history on the site, a constituent had died at that location a few years ago.

4.     The timescales for the proposed measures to be brought in.

5.     Residents wished the Committee to note that it had taken the best part of five years to reinstate the school crossing patrol, and it would cause a major problem should that person decide to retire or leave. There would be a call for more action if and when that patrol left.

The Director responded as follows:

1. She acknowledged that there might have been some differences in activity on a different day to when the survey was undertaken, but stressed that the survey had been conducted in June during nice weather on two different days.  This had given a representative view of the level of activity outside the school, in line with the requirement to consider average levels of activity in deciding whether a crossing would be justified.

2. The full data would be shared with Members.

3. The Director recognised sensitivities around accidents, however, officers had to operate to the recorded accident history over the past five years provided by the police, and there was no record of accident within the time period.

4. Consultation would be required for the parking bays, and school keep clear markings. Officers would be requested to set out a timetable of works which would be provided to Mr. Bray.

Arising from discussion, the following points arose:

i.          A Member requested that, in the future with the increased popularity of the school, the issue be revisited in the future to check whether the Crossing Justification Value (CJV) of 0.7-0.9 had been reached to justify a zebra crossing.

ii.          A Member queried how many people equated to the difference of 0.14 between the current Crossing Justification Value (CJV) and the required level to justify the provision of a zebra crossing, given there was a recent approval of a development of flats close to the location. The Director informed the meeting that the CJV was based on a formula used that included other factors, such as, vehicle flow on the road, pedestrians crossing and vulnerable people, therefore an absolute figure could not be given. However, if something significant changed in the vicinity, for example, if the school changed its size, that would then trigger a reassessment.

iii.          The Lead Petitioner would be updated on the contents of the report and on the comments received from Mr. Mullaney.

The Chairman said  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport which provided an overview of work being undertaken on the development of a programme of Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs) and sought the Committee’s views on the drafts of the first two LCWIPs in the programme for the Loughborough area and South of Leicester area, prior to seeking Cabinet approval in November 2023. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 9’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points arose:

i.          A Member queried what consultation had taken place with stakeholders engaged in the process regarding crossover journeys into the city. The Director explained that information had been collected from stakeholders and communities, Leicester City Council and the district councils to inform the development of the LCWIPs. Where funding streams were available, the planning of routes would be logical and on occasion link cross-border with joined-up development. Having the plan created a baseline and evidence base for securing funding.

ii.          A Member queried whether issues with maintenance of the highway could stop people from using cycles and asked if this had been raised as part of the consultation. It was confirmed that this issue had raised by local communities and fed back as part of the Council’s regular meetings with the Department of Transport (DfT).  The DfT was currently considering the future funding of highway maintenance, including looking at multi-year settlements.  However, it was acknowledged that local authorities would need to make the case to the Treasury for more funding in this area.

iii.          It was reported there was a spike in walking and cycling during the pandemic, but that there had subsequently been a return to car usage. The collection of data around car usage was currently better that that for walking and cycling.  It was suggested that one positive of the pandemic was that more people were now working from home at least some of the time.  This gave an opportunity to encourage people to cycle or walk to local services.

iv.          In terms of the timetables for the LCWIPs it was expected that two plans per year would be developed.  Where possible the plans would be aligned to the development of Local Plans.

v.          It was noted that all of the plans were dependent on funding for their delivery which would come from a range of sources, such as grants and funding from developers.

vi.          In response to a query as to how priority areas were chosen, it was noted the report contained some of the criteria for selecting those priority areas. However, priority areas were largely chosen around the ease of the potential to shift people from short journeys by car to walking and cycling, and also recognising that some areas had already benefited from a round of investment on infrastructure, Hinckley being one of them. The Committee was pleased to note that plans would be developed for areas that connected together, rather than creating arbitrary boundaries.

RESOLVED:

a)    That the report on the development of Local Cycle and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs) be noted.

b)    That the comments now made by the Committee on the draft of the first two LCWIPs in the programme for the Loughborough area and South of Leicester area be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting in November 2023.

The Committee considered a joint report of the Chief Executive and Director of Environment and Transport which provided the latest performance update on the key performance indicators (KPIs) the County Council was solely or partly responsible for within its Strategic Plan covering Highways and Transport Services (within the Environment and Transport Department) to June 2023 (Quarter One). A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 10’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points arose:

i.          The Committee was advised that elected members would soon receive a request to complete the national highways and transport survey.  The Director strongly encouraged Committee members to do so.  It was explained that, whilst this was a national survey, it would include local information collected from members of the public, parish councils and elected members. The public survey results were aggregated and compared against the other 33 county councils, from which targets for improvement were set.

ii.          A Member asked whether the number of bus passengers included children travelling to school on public bus services. The Member also requested that statistical comparisons be provided. The Director of Environment and Transport would provide the detail of the passenger journeys to the Member after the meeting. However, it was noted the information would be about public, local bus services, and not specific school services.

RESOLVED:

a)    That the report on the latest performance update on the key performance indicators the County Council is solely or partly responsible for within its Strategic Plan covering Highways and Transport Services (within the Environment and Transport Department) to June 2023 (Quarter One) be noted.

b)    That the Director of Environment and Transport be requested to provide members with further detail regarding local bus passenger journeys originating in the authority area.

The date of the next meeting is scheduled for 9 November 2023, at 2.00pm.

It was noted that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on 9 November 2023 at 2.00pm.