Agenda item

1.

Question from Amber Astron Christo to Cabinet Member Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

At the Council meeting I attended previously, you had said you would deal with the issue of lack of street cleaning. However, there seems to be little change. The impression I get is that there is no intent to keep the streets of Cheltenham clean. The town centre is one small part of the town. What exactly is the policy on street cleaning for Cheltenham? Are you intending to take proper action over this issue?

Response from Cabinet Member

As Cabinet Member for Clean and Green Environment, keeping the town clean is a priority and residents in Cheltenham will see the two new 15 tonne mechanical road sweepers out and about and we are already seeing improvements in the cleanliness of our roads, not just in the town centre but out in the borough too.  The previous two road sweepers were hire vehicles which kept breaking down and to maintain the high quality standards expected across the town new vehicles have been purchased and will be better able to deal with the impact of the changing weather patterns and leaf fall throughout the year.

Street cleansing is being reviewed this year as part of our commitment to improve standards work has already started in the town centre.  Positive feedback from businesses about the cleanliness in the town centre is welcomed and these improvements will be rolled out across the borough between now and the end of March 2020.

I can confirm there is a programme of mechanical street sweeping which starts in the town centre and along our gateway routes into Cheltenham early every morning and then moves out into the borough.  The mechanical sweeper drivers have a list of roads each day to sweep which, over the period of a year, covers all roads in Cheltenham.  Some areas need more mechanical street sweeping than others, particularly where there is heavier leaf fall.  A programme of manual street sweeping/detritus clearing is also in place which includes a manual clean out of those gutters/gullies as necessary. 

Where drains are blocked, Gloucestershire County Council/highways are asked to assist in clearing out the drains however there are frequent difficulties with their availability and parked cars blocking gullies or drains.  We will continue to work with residents and Gloucestershire County Council/highways to ensure our drains are cleared.

The specific issues raised have been responded to separately but in all cases service visits took place between early August and the end of September.

Supplementary question from Amber Astron Christo

Are you going to reverse the policy for cleaning residential streets, which at the moment only get cleaned when people make repeated complaints?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment clarified that a regular street cleaning regime was in place. He acknowledged that this process needed to be constantly analysed and revisited in order to maximise its effectiveness.

2.

Question from Amber Astron Christo to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

It has been reported that £37.5 million was paid for the 45 hectares of land for the Cyber Park.

a)    Was this figure calculated as industrial or residential land, or both, and were Government Land Estimate values used?

b)    Did the seller know the intended use of the land prior to the deal?

c)    How many of the 3000 homes to be built will be solely for Cyber Park workers, how many for local people, and how many will be affordable 1/2/3 bedroom properties?

Response from Cabinet Member

a)  The land purchased is allocated for employment and residential. Therefore viability appraisals were undertaken based on office/mixed-use and residential values. Market data was used to indicate values. Government Land Estimate values were not used.

b)  Yes, the sellers were aware of the intended use of the land.  The uses are identified under policy A7 in the Joint Core Strategy.

c)  Residential accommodation is unlikely to be restricted to Cyber Park workers. The Joint Core Strategy Policy states that ‘within the strategic allocation sites a minimum of 35% affordable housing will be sought’. Any development will be sought in line with planning policy.

Supplementary question from Amber Astron Christo

The response stated that affordable housing would be ‘sought’. Who will that request be sought from, and why can the Council not just demand since it owns the land?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Leader of the Council responded that this specific comment related to the planning process, wherein a Joint Core Strategy had been agreed. This stated that in the case of urban extensions, the Council would seek a minimum of 35% affordable housing. The Council would be keen to insist upon it, but the JCS required that certain viability criteria be satisfied first. The Council owned some of the land that will be involved, which offers a greater likelihood of achieving what it wanted.

3.

Question from Peter Clegg to Cabinet Member Clean & Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

It strikes me that CBC will have difficulty meeting Net-Zero by 2030 if it does not work closely with other Glos councils whatever their political makeup. Is CBC actively pursuing working with other Glos Councils in respect of tackling all the issues associated with the Climate Emergency.

Note on P37 The solutions that Cheltenham requires to achieve carbon neutrality will both support and be supported by activity in neighbouring District and City Councils, and at the County level. Existing relationships will need to be strengthened and new relationships formed to ensure that collaboration is smooth across the whole organisation. These will include other agencies, such as Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Trust, who will be critical partners to successfully deliver the target.

Did CBC consider working partnerships with other Gloucestershire councils & GCC before commissioning an external consultant and additionally, the costs of 'going it alone’ will be prohibitive for each council, yet there will be overlap of resources and projects. For each council to run its own Citizen’s assembly, possibly including the same external experts this would be repetitive and costly. Have CBC considered this?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Council has and will continue to work with other Gloucestershire councils, businesses, residents and community organisations to help meet the 2030 net-zero targets, which we acknowledge will be hugely challenging.  

The Council’s lead consultant, Simon Graham, has engaged with a number of organisations prior to drafting his report, including other Gloucestershire Councils, businesses and community organisations when preparing its report. 

It is worth highlighting that Gloucestershire Councils have declared climate emergencies at different times and there was a target deadline for Cheltenham’s high level plan to be presented to full Council, due to the agreed emergency.

An external specialist consultant was commissioned to give the authority added expertise, insight and capacity to create a credible overview of the extent of change required to meet the 2030 targets requested by Council. Each local authority area has different opportunities and challenges depending on their geographical location and circumstances, but there are clearly opportunities for project collaboration, sharing of resources and expertise.

Simon was selected to help the Council, as he knows Cheltenham well, having previously worked for a number of years at local company Commercial Ltd, driving the implementation of a very successful sustainability programme and achieving a number of ‘firsts’ for the company, including first in the sector to be Carbon Neutral and Zero Waste.

Community and wider stakeholder engagement will be an essential element in meeting the 2030 target, because the authority cannot hope to achieve this without the buy-in of the public, the business community and the voluntary sector. The Council will be engaging with other Gloucestershire authorities to establish how best this can be done, including the option for a Citizens’ Assembly.

A meeting of senior officers from authorities across the county is taking place at Stroud on 5^th November.

 4.

Question from Peter Clegg to Cabinet Member Housing, Councillor Peter Jeffries

The report discusses at some length the need for a range of renewable energy and Net Zero Buildings for new build, but as the report noted Cheltenham has a Regency legacy as well as a 60’s legacy of poorly insulated properties. The consultants report mentions retrofit almost in passing, yet with such a large housing stock already existing these buildings, many in the private rental sector, have to be substantially improved for Net Zero carbon reduction.

What measures will CBC take to ensure these poorly insulated properties, many in private ownership, are upgraded?

Response from Cabinet Member

See answer to Q5.

In addition, the Council recognises the need for a step-change in the energy efficiency of the existing housing stock. This will need to include a reappraisal of the authority’s own dwelling stock, the majority of which is currently heated by fossil-gas. One suggestion is that we should apply energy efficiency measures to a number of local authority dwelling types, to use as exemplars of what can be achieved to incentivise investment by home owners and landlords.

Here again there are challenges for government, as rental formulas linking to housing benefit do not allow energy costs to be taken into account. This is another area where the government needs to consider how it can intervene to help encourage the changes required through financial incentives. It would also be helpful for VAT to be removed from energy efficiency measures.

Ultimately through a combination of leadership, collaboration and enabling, home owners should be able to reduce their carbon footprint, we all must work continuously to maximise the number of homes within our communities reach the net zero target.

Supplementary Question

For many years, Vision 21 organised Cheltenham Green Open Doors, where local householders opened their homes to display their approach to sustainability issues (e.g. solar panels, insulation). Over two days, 500-700 visitors visit around 20 homes. Will the Council support this initiative? It halted due to a lack of financial support despite support from local businesses and newspapers.

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Housing responded that collaborative work with communities is key. He indicated that he would be willing to support the initiative were he to receive more information about it.

5.

Question from Rose Lennard toCabinet Member Development & Safety Andrew McKinlay

Cheltenham has a high proportion of listed buildings which are both hard to insulate and heat, and which usually have a lot of planning (Listed Building) restrictions on what can be done to their fabric, making it hard for home owners to carry out improvements to help achieve the carbon neutral target. Does the Council have any proposals for how to tackle this problem?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Council has long supported energy efficiency initiatives in relation to both its own housing stock and through the promotion of grant incentives to private sector dwellings. The county-wide ‘Warm and Well’ project, which has operated for many years and is delivered in partnership with the Severn Wye Energy Agency, is a good example of this and has included initiatives in relation to ‘hard to treat’ homes.

In respect of Listed buildings specifically, of which Cheltenham has 2,602, there are no universal quick and easy answers to this conundrum.

To become carbon neutral means moving away from using fossil-gas as a heat source and re-thinking the required energy efficiency of existing and new-build housing. At the moment, there is nothing in place to force improvements to the existing building stock and Listed buildings have statutory protections, which probably need to be reconsidered in light of the climate emergency.

Similarly, the Building Regulations set the minimum energy efficiency standards for new build and Cheltenham has previously fallen foul of the planning inspectorate by seeking to impose higher standards, resulting in cost awards against the authority.

There is therefore a need here to ask the government to either raise the national standards, or provide more autonomy to local government to act at the local level without fear of financial penalty. We are likely to be writing to government if the recommendations in the climate report are accepted by Council and I would be happy to include a reference to this issue.

Supplementary Question

You have said that you are likely to write to government if the recommendations in the report are adopted by the council. Can we take this as an assurance that you will be writing to the government?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety confirmed that this would be the case.

6.

Question from Rose Lennard to Cabinet Member Development & Safety Andrew McKinlay

Tree planting is a quick win and popular with the public. Letting trees plant themselves (natural regeneration) is very low or zero cost. Has the Council started to identify sites for more tree cover, and is the option of natural regeneration being considered as part of the approach?

Response from Cabinet Member

Yes, the authority is actively looking at both of these options and would encourage other landowners to consider how they might work in partnership with the authority and other organisations to help deliver on this ambition.

Supplementary Question

You say that local authorities are actively looking at both of these options and would encourage other landowners to consider how they might work with this partnership. How is the Council going to go about this – outreach, publicity, education or contact with local landowners?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety responded that it was premature at this stage to confirm an exact plan. CBC would initially look at its own land and consider which sites would most benefit. Partners and other landowners would invariably be included in the process.

7.

Question from Dave Entwistle  to Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

Question regarding 'Carbon Neutral Cheltenham - Leadership through Stewardship’

Section 6.1 3rd bullet point.

• Some political groups in the area might be more progressive then others and therefore, there was a concern about establishing a joint assembly, where it might not be possible to secure agreement on targets.

Please would you explain the meaning behind this statement?

Response from Cabinet Member

I was not at the meeting referred to and cannot therefore comment on what the meaning was behind this statement. However, it is clear from the unanimous Council vote in relation to the climate emergency declaration, that there is cross-party support for local action to quickly reduce the carbon emissions of both CBC and the borough as a whole.

8.

Question from Dave Entwistle  to Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

Question regarding 'Carbon Neutral Cheltenham - Leadership through Stewardship’

Section 6.2

• 6.2  The Chair felt that the fundamental problem was that those things that were killing the planet were also those things that made life more comfortable and certain people the most money. She felt that the carrot was always more successful than the stick, but acknowledged that this was something that would need to be tackled in partnership with other organisations.

Who was the Chair and does the council agree with her statement, if so, does this mean that the council is unwilling to employ metaphorical sticks, despite the fact a Climate Emergency exists?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Chair, Councillor Klara Sudbury, was expressing a personal view and I understand from her that she is for instance keen to ensure more cycle infrastructure is in place to encourage people to feel safe cycling before complaining about not enough people cycling.

However, it is reasonable to assume that delivering the 2030 net zero target will require a mixture of both ‘carrot and stick’.

It is worth noting that the Council has shown a willingness to be proactive in the face of some local opposition, for example, in relation to traffic management changes at Boots’ corner, primarily aimed at improving public transport punctuality and the town centre environment for walking and cycling.

9.

Question from Betti Stephens to the Leader, Councillor Steve Jordan 

Question regarding Carbon Neutral Cheltenham

Thank you to Cheltenham Borough Council for your efforts so far on this subject – a massive challenge as we see from the risk assessment table, but one that we have to tackle with urgency.

The vision for Cheltenham as set out in the report by DCA states:

 ‘The vision for 2030,is that Cheltenham fulfils its vision to be a place: where all our people and the communities they live in thrive; where culture and creativity thrives, celebrated and enjoyed throughout the year; where businesses and their workforces thrive and where everyone thrives, in a setting that is net zero carbon and recognisably, iconically Cheltenham’.

This doesn’t make any mention of other species, nature, biodiversity. Without a thriving natural ecology our own species becomes increasingly vulnerable in all sorts of ways. Can this vision be amended to explicitly embrace the wider natural world?

Response from Cabinet Member

A thriving natural ecology is very important and the Council is already working on issues such as encouraging greater biodiversity. I don’t believe the communities we live in will thrive if we don’t have a thriving natural ecology as well so the issues raised are implicit in the vision outlined which is taken from the existing Cheltenham Place Strategy.

See also answer to Qu 10 below.

10.

Question from Betti Stephens to Cabinet Member Clean & Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

Question regarding Carbon Neutral Cheltenham

The ambitious plans and measures will require as much support and buy-in from the wider community. Has the Council considered ways to encourage the widest possible engagement from the local community and – most importantly – mechanisms to maintain this engagement in the long term?

Response from Cabinet Member

See answer to Q3 above.

11.

Question from Ed Saul to Cabinet Member Clean & Green Environment, Councillor Chris Coleman

"While the Council report rightly focuses its attentions on carbon neutrality and sustainability, the international debate is now focusing on regeneration – such as the Common Earth initiative established on Fri 4th. Oct by members of the Commonwealth. There is a genuine risk that focusing only on industrial emissions and not proactive sequestering will make council initiatives obsolete long before they are completed. We have come to the point at which local governments must consider rewilding solutions such as Multistrata Agroforestry, Tree Plantations and Wildlife Corridors.

What consideration, if any, has CBC given to regenerating natural resources and wildlife, the latter particularly in light of the recent State of Nature report showing that 40% of wild species in the UK have declined since 1970?”

Response from Cabinet Member

The climate change agenda presents us all with huge challenges and we have to be honest in accepting the contribution which Cheltenham and its citizens have and continue to make to environmental degradation, including habitat pressures on wildlife. This position cannot be easily reversed, but it is critical that we seek to do so. This will require political commitment for lifestyle changes across the planet on a scale which many will find difficult to accept. 

The Council has taken the initiative by publicly declaring a climate emergency and is reviewing its own activities in light of the cross-party commitment to work towards carbon neutrality for CBC and the wider borough by 2030.

In addition to responsibility for many of the green amenity spaces across Cheltenham, including Leckhampton Hill, a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Council is undertaking lots of work aimed at maintaining and/or promoting natural resources and wildlife. To an extent this is ‘business as usual’ for the authority, but we acknowledge the scope for the authority to have a more significant impact on wildlife and carbon emissions in future years.

Recent examples of demonstrable action would include moving towards more wild flower and perennial planting in our gardens; creating a wildflower butterfly meadow as part of our new crematorium project and working with ‘The Friends of Winston Churchill Gardens’, who have secured trees from The Woodland Trust for planting on the Honeybourne Line.

We are also looking to set up a project with volunteers at Benhall Open Space and Elmfield Playing Field in connection with ‘The Big Climate Fightback’ on 30th November, with the aim of planting 1,000 plus trees.

We are also involved in a major project ‘Connecting and Creating Habitat’looking to introduce more biodiverse spaces into the town centre, with the new planting areas in the High Street (in front of John Lewis) being an example of this. This scheme has received match funding from the European Structural Investment Fund.

The Council’s work is taking place despite recent austerity measures and cuts to local authority funding. It is therefore essential that we continue to press for more resources for local government to support the local action that will be essential to mitigate the potential severity of climate change and to prepare for the inevitable consequences of global heating that are already happening.

12.

Question from Adrian Becker to the Leader, Councillor Steve Jordan 

It is heartening to read that “CBC currently interrogates the climate change implications of every decision”. This isn’t however set out very clearly in committee reports. Will the leader of the Council instruct officers to clearly set out the total CO2 emissions that will be emitted as a result of the decisions recommended in each committee report, including planning decisions?

Response from Cabinet Member

We recognise the significance of the authority’s decisions on the environment and the pertinence of their CO₂ impact. As stated CBC does attempt to assess the implications of every decision.

However, we have no current mechanism to calculate the exact CO₂ emission impact of every decision which the Council needs to make to carry out its business. Bearing in mind the financial pressures on local government we need to ensure the cost of reaching a decision is not more than actually implementing it, but are happy to investigate with others how this may be made more effective.

13.

Question from Adrian Becker to the Cabinet Member Finance  Councillor Rowena Hay 

The report makes clear that investments made by pension funds to which CBC contributes are not included in the carbon emissions of the Council. Will the Leader of the Council make a member of the existing CLT responsible for coordinating lobbying of the Gloucestershire LGPS until the pension fund divests from the carbon economy?

Response from Cabinet Member

Gloucestershire County Council Pensions Section are responsible for the administration of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) for the 200+ employers and their employees within the geographical area of Gloucestershire.

The LGPS is a statutory, funded, Career Average Revalued Earnings (CARE) pension scheme. As such the scheme is very secure as benefits are defined and guaranteed by law. Any changes to the legislation of the scheme are governed nationally by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG).

Cheltenham Borough Council, and most of the other Gloucestershire district councils and the county council have declared a Climate Emergency, as such I would expect our respective representatives to make clear our desire to move to a carbon neutral economy and that pension fund investments should reflect that. I have asked our representative to do this.

I also asked the County’s Pension Section for the current position and I’m still waiting for a reply, however the following may be helpful.

Gloucestershire Pensions Committee is the decision-making body of the pension fund, in the past it would make the allocations of investments directly with investment fund managers. A few years ago, government required LGPS bodies to come together in partnerships and ‘pool’ their funds to increase economies of scale and be big enough to invest in infrastructure. Gloucestershire is part of the Brunel Pension Partnership, so now the Pension Committee choose the asset class and Brunel choose the investment fund manager.

The Environment Agency Pension Fund, which has had a highly developed ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and RI (Responsible Investment) strategy, has played a key role in shaping the ethos of the Brunel Partnership.

I also know that moving towards a low carbon investment strategy has been discussed at the committee on a number of occasions and further debate is to be had on the subject. Recently around £50 million was invested in low carbon equities, however this is only just over 2% of the whole fund.

14.

Question from Lorraine Du Feu  to Cabinet Member Corporate Services, Councillor Alex Hegenbarth

At the Climate Assembly organised by Max Wilkinson in August a lot of people were asking for a Citizens’ Assembly to be set up.  Max stated that if that was what we wanted the council would do it.

To avoid confusion, what we all meant by a Citizens’ Assembly is a representative sample of citizens randomly selected by an independent body, informed by expert evidence, supported by experienced independent facilitators in their subsequent deliberations and compensated for their contribution to ensure that all invited are able to take part.

It is important for the acceptance of what might be quite difficult measures that honest discussions are held openly so that there is a town-wide consensus on what needs to be done.  It is crucial that party politics is taken out of the process and that people feel that the recommended measures have come from them rather than being foisted upon them by the council.

Deliberative democracy of this type has been proved to be sensible, inclusive and effective and provides a model for doing politics better at a time when many people have lost faith with it.

Both the DCA report and the council’s Carbon Neutral Cheltenham report stress the need for engagement with the public, but neither recommends a Citizens’ Assembly, which I would argue should be the first process.

Will the council amend their report to recommend the setting up of a Citizens Assembly at the earliest opportunity?

Response from Cabinet Member

Continuing to take the local community with us as we tackle climate change will be essential. We are considering with others the best ways to do this and I support the option of a Citizens Assembly to help do this.

Supplementary Question

‘Considering with others’ sounds like the council is operating behind closed doors. A meeting was held by Councillor Wilkinson in August to determine a way forward for the council, and a Citizens Assembly was overwhelmingly supported as a first measure. Since then, action has been delayed by the commissioning of a report. The public needs to be more involved. If the council is intending to take the public with it, why is it ignoring the clearly expressed will of the public?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services responded that the council was engaging with a variety of different parties, including Gloucestershire County Council, the LEP, the Cheltenham Trust and companies within the town. He agreed that there should be an independent Citizens Assembly. This should be an organic process, set up by citizens, with representatives speaking to the council to ensure that they can successfully work in partnership.

15.

Question from Peter Sayers to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

I understand, from an announcement made by Councillor Bernard Fisher at the SPRA meeting on 26th September 2019 that a TRO is being proposed that will restrict traffic entering St Paul's Road from Clarence Square. This will be handled by Highways of Gloucestershire County Council but affects a great number of residents of Cheltenham and thus is also a Borough matter. Please let me know where to find the details of this proposal and the traffic modelling that will accompany any such proposal?

Response from

My understanding is that County & Borough Councillor Fisher has been working hard over many years and liaising with Gloucestershire County Council highways colleagues regarding adjustments to St Paul’s Road. Whilst initial ambitions, raised by residents in St Paul’s included a ‘20mph’ zone and access restrictions, we understand that at this time the request will focus solely upon the installation of a pedestrian crossing in St Paul’s Road near the entrance to the University.

GCC will be considering wider options and potential mitigation should the Boots Corner trial be made permanent. This is outside the existing commitment for 2020/21 financial to improve the traffic light synchronisation on the A4019.

I have no further details at this moment but suggest that contact is made with GCC as the highways authority. I am however, confident that GCC will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

16.

Question from Peter Sayers to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

In regard to the proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square into St Paul's Road, please let me know what pre-TRO consultation with the large number of residents in the surrounding areas that will be affected are to take place and how and, more importantly, when will this be conducted?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road.

Supplementary Question

I understand that there is no Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) at present for this particular junction. However, I cannot understand why those affected by the possible change have not been consulted. Why not?

The questioner also suggested that it would be helpful for the councillor concerned (Bernard Fisher) to meet with residents to discuss the topic.

Response from Cabinet Member

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety responded that this was because there was currently no proposed TRO. If the Boots Corner trial was made permanent, there would be a standard consultation process and a TRO, following the correct protocol. At this stage, the question was hypothetical.

17.

Question from Alan McDougall  to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Minutes from a meeting of SPRA on 26th September 2019 state that a TRO is being proposed that will restrict traffic entering St Paul's Road from Clarence Square. There has been no inclusive consultation with residents of Clarence Square or surrounding streets regarding the proposed TRO. The south side of Clarence Square comes under the ward of St Pauls, as does Monson Avenue and Wellesley Road, however the majority of Clarence Square is in Pittville and to the best of knowledge there has been no advice given to local residents on the details of the proposal by either CBC/GCC in general or by Pittville’s two CBC councillors specifically.

In view of the fact there is a backlog in dealing with TROs will you confirm that in the interests of transparency all residents in these adjacent areas will be consulted prior to any agreement by CBC/GCC being made to the current proposal?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15 below, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

18.

Question from Alan McDougall  to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

The ‘trial’ closure of Boots Corner having led to increased traffic flows on the south side of Clarence Square and St Pauls Road itself as traffic avoids congestion on St Margarets Road A4019 has undoubtedly led to increased levels of NO2 in these residential streets thereby endangering public health. While the proposal to make St Pauls Road a one way system is probably intended to reduce traffic volumes the TRO is in fact being considered in isolation to present and future impact on these adjacent streets.

Will you confirm that any increase to traffic volumes for Monson Avenue, already impossible to negotiate at peak times/weekends and seasonal extremes such as Christmas due to vehicle blockages at the NCP carpark entrance/exit and those planned for the imminent development of Portland Street/North Place carpark have been factored into the overall modelling success of the proposed scheme?

Response from Cabinet Member

As I am not aware of any TRO proposal relating to St Paul’s Road, other than a pedestrian crossing, I am unable to advise upon any traffic modelling that has or is taking place.

19.

Question from Robert Lees to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Could I please ask you to let me know where I can see the final details of the proposal that a TRO will restrict traffic access from Clarence Square into St. Paul’s Road following the announcement made by Councillor Bernard Fisher at the SPRA meeting on 26/09/2019.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road.

20.

Question from Robert Lees to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

With regard to the proposed TRO mentioned above, when will there be a public consultation so that concerned residents can express their views.

Response from Cabinet Member 

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

21.

Question fromDr Charles Garcia-Rodriguez to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Regarding the proposed closure of the Clarence Square access to St Paul's Road.

Given that drivers will seek other routes if there is a traffic restriction, are physical measures proposed to stop vehicles using the narrow mews road of Clarington Mews as a cut-through to travel between Clarence Square and Wellesley Road and then to St Paul’s Road in a similar way as further north a narrowing along Wellesley road restricts cut through traffic to and from Wellington Road and Wellington Square?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road.

22.

Question fromDr Charles Garcia-Rodriguez to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Regarding the proposed closure of the Clarence Square access to St Paul's Road.

I am a resident who lives approximately 100m from the proposed traffic restriction and as such will be profoundly affected by it. Why have I had no formal notice from the council or any other public body about this nor any ability to influence or modify the proposal?

Response from Cabinet Member

I can only assume that you have not been notified because no such formal proposal is being pursued. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

23.

Question from Sock Koh to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

What models of traffic flow have been or will be done to study the impact of this proposed TRO?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road and consequently I am not aware of any traffic modelling being undertaken regarding this proposal.

24.

Question from Sock Koh to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

What proper & meaningful consultations will be done with communities that will be affected by this TRO?

Response from Cabinet Member

I am confident that GCC will, through Councillor Fisher, engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

25.

Question from Barbara Lees to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Re the proposed TRO restricting traffic entering St Paul’s Road from Clarence Square, what consideration has the council given to public safety in the narrow streets that will become rat runs if this proposal goes ahead?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. However, I can advise that a key component of any TRO consideration is safety and any proposals will be subject to a ‘road safety audit’.

26.

Question from Barbara Lees to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

I live in Clarington Mews and I would like to know when I will be consulted on the above proposal as I am bound to be materially affected by any changes.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC will, through Councillor Fisher, engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

27.

Question from Tom Perris to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Regarding TRO in Clarence Square

Are there plans to have a public consultation on any proposed alteration of traffic flow to involve residents who will be affected by them?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

28.

Question from Tom Perris to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

Regarding TRO in Clarence Square

Has there been an assessment of the impact on surrounding streets, both main and residential with inevitable increased traffic and, given that local residents know little of this proposal, what measures are proposed to stop traffic using the cut-through routes, for example, via Clarington Mews?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15 I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

29.

Question from Roland Jones to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

I understand from the announcement by Cllr Fisher at the SPRA meeting on 29/09/2019 that a TRO is being proposed to restrict traffic entering St Paul's Road from Clarence Square. Where can we find the precise details of the proposal?

e.g. There will be an obvious effect on traffic going up Monson Avenue. Currently the lights only let 5 vehicles through at a time.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

30.

Question from Roland Jones to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

What consultation will there be? And with whom?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any proposal is being actively considered.

31.

Question from Edward Hignett to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

I understand from an announcement made by Councillor Bernard Fisher at the SPRA meeting on the 26th September 2019 that a TRO is being proposed that will restrict traffic entering St. Pauls Road from Clarence Square. This will be handled by Highways of Gloucester County Council but affects a great number of residents in Cheltenham and thus is also a Borough matter. Please let me know where to find the details of this proposal and the traffic modelling that will accompany any such proposal.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

32.

Question from Edward Hignett to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

In regard to the proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square into St. Pauls Road, please let me know what pre-TRO consultation with the large number of residents in the surrounding areas that will be affected are to take place and how and more importantly when will this be conducted?

As a resident of Wellesley Road I foresee, as a result of this TRO, increased traffic on my road which is without pavement and unsuited to fast driving. During the recent road closure on St. Pauls Road for the street party Wellesley Road became a rat run of speeding traffic. Wellesley Road is also regularly used by parents and young children coming and going to Dunalley school. Also Clarington Mews which is a single track lane would also become a rat run should the proposed TRO go ahead.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered. My understanding is that County Councillor Fisher has been liaising with GCC highways colleagues over a lengthy period regarding adjustments to St Paul’s Road. Whilst initial ambitions included a ‘20mph’ zone and access restrictions we understand that at this time the request will focus solely upon the installation of a pedestrian crossing in St Paul’s Road near the entrance to the University.

33.

Question from Chloe Skinner  to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

In regard to the proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square into St Pauls Road, please let me know how this will affect the traffic flow along Wellesley Road.  We are concerned that Clarington Mews and Wellesley Road will become a rat-run for traffic.  These two roads are unsuitable for anything other than light traffic.

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

34.

Question from Stacey Reynolds  to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

I understand from an announcement made by Counsellor Bernard Fisher at The SPRA Meeting on 26 September that a TRO is being proposed that will restrict traffic entering St Paul’s Road from Clarence Square. This will be handled by Highways of Gloucestershire Council but affects a number of residents of Cheltenham and thus I feel is also a borough matter. Please can you advise where I can find the details of this proposal and the traffic modelling that will accompany this proposals?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered.

35.

Question from Stacey Reynolds  to Cabinet Member Development & Safety, Councillor Andrew McKinlay

In regard to the proposed TRO to restrict flow from Clarence Square into St Paul’s Road, please let me know what pre-TRO consultation with the large number of residents in the surrounding area that will be affected are to take place and how and when they will be conducted?

Response from Cabinet Member

As noted in Qu 15, I am not aware of any proposed TRO to restrict traffic flow from Clarence Square to St Paul’s Road. I am confident that GCC, through Councillor Fisher, will engage with residents and CBC on matters affecting them when any formal proposal is being actively considered. My understanding is that County Councillor Fisher has been liaising with GCC highways colleagues over a lengthy period regarding adjustments to St Paul’s Road. Whilst initial ambitions included a ‘20mph’ zone and access restrictions we understand that at this time the request will focus solely upon the installation of a pedestrian crossing in St Paul’s Road near the entrance to the University.