Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2026 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The Chief Executive reported that two questions had been received under Standing Order 32.

 

1. Question asked by Adam Stares

“In the previous MTFS (2025) the Highways and Transport department was set to make savings of £1.24million across nine areas (ET1 to ET9) for the 2025/26 financial year.

Given that there is little over a month left in the current fiscal year has the department delivered these savings / is it on track to do so, and how does this break down across the nine sections?”

Reply by the Chairman

 

Highways and Transport Services is currently exceeding the £1.24m saving target for 2025/26 by £2.49m or 200%. The main driver of this uplift has been an overachievement of savings delivered through the Assisted Transport Programme (£2.09m) and Network Management (£0.40m). These overachievements have been built into the 2026-30 MTFS as an ongoing saving. Savings delivery against target for 2025/26 are detailed below:

 

 

2. Question asked by Theresa Eynon

 

“The re-routed Arriva no.15 Coalville to Ibstock bus has no stops on its route between Lower Farm Road and Hugglescote Post Office (a distance of about a mile) and passes Hugglescote Surgery and Mason's Chemist without stopping to set down or pick up passengers.

Hugglescote Surgery is on Grange Road, at the bottom of a steep hill. Patients have complained about the lack of a bus stop ever since the surgery was relocated from Forest Road in 2009.

I understand from Arriva's Customer Service Team that the bus company have asked this authority for permission to provide extra stops along Grange Rd, including near the surgery/chemist, but Highways have given a number of reasons for not progressing their request.

(a)      What reasons have Highways given for not allowing a bus stop near Hugglescote Surgery?

b)       What would enable a bus stop to be provided on Grange Road, near to Hugglescote Surgery, for the benefit of residents of both the new estates and the town centre?

(c)      How soon could this service be provided?”

 

 

Reply by the Chairman

 

(a)           An initial assessment of Hugglescote Surgery indicated that a stop cannot be located outside the Surgery due to several hazards in the immediate area. These include multiple driveways, junctions, central islands, right‑turn lanes, pedestrian crossing points, and cycle facilities joining the carriageway, which make it a difficult location to site a bus stop. Further detailed assessment will be required to determine the feasibility of any alternative options within 200 meters of the surgery.

 

 

(b)           A full assessment will need to be undertaken by Traffic and Safety Technician to identify any potentially alternative suitable locations between Hugglescote Surgery and Lower Farm Road.

 

(c)           This bus stop assessment has been requested and the outcome of the assessment will be available in 4 weeks.

Supplementary Questions:

 

“Will any risk assessment take into account the risks to the health and wellbeing of not providing a bus stop most particularly the risks to patients who need to access the surgery but who are unable to drive?”

 

Reply:

 

There was no specific health and wellbeing assessment carried out but there was an Equality Impact Assessment undertaken as part of the Bus Service Improvement Plan24 (BSIP24) this looked at wider considerations and can be viewed here:

https://democracy.leics.gov.uk/documents/s185082/Appendix%20B%20-%20Equality%20Impact%20Assessment.pdf

 

“Will it be possible for the bus stop assessment to include a short site meeting including local Elected members from this Council, as well as the District Council and Parish Council?”

 

Reply:

 

Bus stop assessments are usually carried out by officers in accordance with the relevant guidance. The key factor is safety. Officers were happy to accommodate the request for a site meeting.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 32 (1).

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 Bradshaw and Mr McDonald both had an Other Registerable Interest in agenda item 9 – the Highway and Transport Capital programme.  Mr Bradshaw was a Trustee at Syston Volunteer Centre who received funding to deliver Passenger Transport and Mr McDonald was a Trustee and owner at Beaver Bus who were contracted to deliver Passenger Transport.

 

The Monitoring Officers guidance was that both Members were still able to participate as part of the discussions on that item.

 

No other declarations were made.

There were no declarations of the party whip.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport who presented the Annual Road Casualty Reduction in Leicestershire update. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item ‘8’ is filed with these minutes.

 

The Chairman welcomed Matthew Chester and Mr Graham Compton of Leicestershire Police to the meeting and thanked them for their attendance to present this item.

 

Arising from the discussion, the following points were made:

 

(i)             Members commented that some safety concerns could not be actioned because sites did not meet the required statistical thresholds. It was suggested that verified local knowledge, potentially through parish councils, could help strengthen the case for interventions.

 

(ii)            Officers explained that new local transport funding allowed the development of a rolling four year programme of works for smaller locally prioritised schemes. Existing records of resident concerns would be considered, and further work would be undertaken to explore how community intelligence could be incorporated.

 

(iii)          Concerns were raised regarding potential car cruising on the new Melton Mowbray Distributor Road (MMDR). Officers confirmed that design measures had been incorporated to discourage antisocial driving behaviour and that safety audits would take place prior to opening. Further operational planning with enforcement partners would also take place prior to the MMDR opening.

 

(iv)          The Community Speedwatch scheme continued to operate across various areas, supported by the Authority and the police. Volunteers received training, and warning letters were issued to drivers identified. Mobile enforcement vans also visited sites following local activity.

 

(v)           It was highlighted that, as no Government trial operated locally, all e-scooters used on public roads in Leicestershire were illegal. A one-strike confiscation policy had resulted in approximately 500–600 removals in the previous year. Modified e-bikes presented a growing risk and were also being seized when they were found to exceed legal speed limits.

 

(vi)          Members raised concerns about increasing red light violations. Police confirmed this issue formed part of the evolving enforcement strategy and that work was in progress to improve the use of dashcam and community video submissions, with further development planned through other local partnerships.

 

(vii)         It was highlighted that a new informal initiative allowed parish councils to place advisory postcards on vehicles in cases of inconsiderate parking or vegetation obstruction. The scheme had been piloted recently and would be reviewed for wider rollout.

 

RESOLVED:

That the Annual Leicestershire Road Safety Reduction update be noted.

 

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport who presented the Environment and Transport Capital Programme and Works Programme for 2026/27. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item ‘9’ is filed with these minutes.

 

Arising from the discussion, the following points were made:

 

(i)      It was reported that the Government had for the first time provided multi-year funding, enabling the Department to undertake longer-term planning for capital schemes and more efficient procurement. It was noted, however, that wider local government finances remained challenging, with increased demands on services. Growth in population, housing and employment continued to place additional pressure on the highway network, while weather related impacts such as more regular and more severe flooding, were contributing to further deterioration of highways assets.

 

(ii)    In response to a Member query on how the Authority planned to manage increased network demand anticipated by population growth, the Director explained that work was underway through regional planning processes, including future infrastructure planning, public transport strategy development and ongoing collaboration with partner authorities. It was highlighted that any large‑scale schemes would require significant investment, far above current funding levels.

 

(iii)   Some Members raised concerns about the extent of Member involvement in selecting projects and the transparency of schemes not taken forward and the reasons for this. Officers highlighted that schemes were prioritised in line with adopted policies, using evidence, including safety data, flooding impacts and feasibility. Members were assured that flooding schemes were assessed based on severity and property impacts, with internal property flooding given top priority. It was suggested that there were some locations which were prone to river flooding and these were usually expensive engineering projects and that schemes not progressed were usually communicated locally but not shared more widely. The Director undertook to give this further consideration with a view to providing more information to the Committee at a future meeting.

 

(iv)   Members were assured that the Local Transport Delivery Plan submitted to the Government had input from the relevant portfolio leads. Due to tight deadlines and late Government guidance, it was difficult to bring this to the Committee but there would be a further final submission of the Plan in September that would allow for Member changes.

 

(v)    A Member sought clarification regarding the replacement of the Melton Highways Depot and the potential relocation of the waste site. The Director provided assurance that work was progressing on a search for a new depot due to the significant operational needs in the area. Feasibility work for relocating the waste site was being considered and the Department was investigating the opportunity to merge the two existing facilities with the potential for funding through a future capital funding bid.

 

(vi)   It was highlighted that pothole reports had risen to more than three times the previous winter’s highest monthly volume. Temporary repairs were being used to keep up with demand. Members were assured that the temporary repairs would be followed with permanent repairs as part of a schedule of works.

 

(vii)  A Member raised a query about progressing the southern link of the Melton Mowbray Distributor Road. It was confirmed that the link remained part of the Council’s longterm strategy, with work continuing with the planning authority and developers as part of the Local Plan with an emphasis on developer led delivery  and that potential future funding opportunities were being explored.

 

(viii)       It was suggested that although the Authority monitored innovation, it had limited capacity for investing in unproven technologies and that national legislation for autonomous vehicles was lacking. Bus services were operated commercially, and technology adoption would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport who presented the Annual Highways Drainage update. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item ‘10’ is filed with these minutes.

 

Arising from the discussion, the following points were made:

 

(i)         A Member raised concerns about the rapid blocking of gullies in rural areas due to mud and debris run off. It was noted that the priority categories had not changed except for priority three gullies, which now had an extended cleansing cycle rather than inspection only, and made possible by new investment. These changes to  gully priorities had been introduced following the 2025 asset review.

 

(ii)        A Member shared positive feedback regarding recent works to infrastructure and watercourses around Barkby Brook, Barkby Thorpe and successful improvements to flooding issues on Churchill Road, Thurmaston. This road had flooded regularly but was now more flood resistant due to the work carried out.

 

(iii)       In response to a Member concerns about highways flooding at Crow Mills, Countersthorpe which was considered an important artery to keep traffic flowing. It was noted that this area along the River Soar was known for the river breaking its banks and overspilling onto the flood plain. This affected the nearby area and caused highway flooding.  The Member was assured that work with the Environment Agency was planned to address such issues.

 

The Lead Member for Environment and Transport commented on recent flooding events, noting that some severe incidents developed overnight with little warning. It was highlighted that the teams had responded effectively, limiting internal flooding where possible. The Lead Member emphasised the importance of coordinated working with external bodies, particularly the Environment Agency and water companies.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Annual Highways Drainage update be noted.

The Committee considered a joint report of the Chief Executive and the Director of Environment and Transport which presented the latest performance update on the Key Performance Indicators. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item ‘11’ is filed with these minutes.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the latest performance update on the Key Performance Indicators for highways, transport and waste services be noted.

The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled to take place on Thursday 4 June 2026 at 2.00pm.

RESOLVED:

 

It was noted that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on 4 June 2026 at 2.00pm.