BOROUGH OF POOLE
ROUTE AND BRANCH WORKING GROUP
29 JANUARY 2015
The meeting commenced at 9.00am and concluded at 11.10am
Present:
Councillor Trent (Chairman)
Councillor Burden (Vice-Chairman)
Councillors Mrs Clements and Mrs Stribley
Also present:
Councillor Potter (Portfolio Holder – Keep Poole Moving)
Others in attendance:
Julian McLaughlin, Head of Transportation Services
John McVey, Passenger Transport Manager,Transportation Services.
Nick Phillips, Accessibility Team Leader,Transportation Services.
Karen Fry, Passenger Transport Co-ordinator, Transportation Services.
Nick Maguire, Democratic Support Officer
- APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
There were no apologies for absence.
- DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS
There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests.
- MINUTES
John Mcvey amended Minute 6 by the deletion of “from Central Government” and the substitution of “by the local authority” in the 5th bullet point.
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 23 July 2014, having previously been circulated, be taken as read and asamended above be signed by the Chairman.
- SUBSIDISED BUS SERVICE REDUCTION CONSULTATION
The Head of Transportation Services submitted a report the purpose of which was to inform Members of the results of the Local Bus Service consultation undertaken during the autumn of 2014 on proposed reductions and to make recommendations to the Council’s Transportation Advisory Group on which changes should be implemented.
The report reminded the Working Group that at its meeting on 23 July 2014 it had been recommended that the Portfolio Holder for Transportation give approval for officers to carry out a consultation exercise on possible service reductions.
The Council had been consulting on a number of proposals to reduce or withdraw local bus services with a view to achieving a savings target of up to £100k per annum associated with the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) plus £56k per annum to support the future operation of the Route ONE town centre bus service (currently supported by developer contributions and LAA funds). The consultation commenced on 16 September 2013 and closed on 5 December 2014.
Bus passengers and their representatives were encouraged to respond to a set of proposals with route maps provided, either on-line via the Council’s website or in writing. Details of the consultation were posted on-line and the local media were informed. Organisations representing bus passengers and other stakeholders were sent full details of the proposals in addition to all Council Members.
Targeted consultation was undertaken with passengers on the routes concerned. Council officers travelled on the affected journeys and recorded passenger numbers; journey purpose and frequency of travel. They also gave passengers the opportunity to comment on how the proposed changes would affect them and submit a full response to the consultation if desired.
A total of 3,041 responses were received to the consultation. The majority of these, 2,929, were completed questionnaires submitted either on-line or hand-written plus 112 letters and emails. Petitions had also been received the details of which had been included in the report. In addition, journey details and comments were recorded from 3,298 passengers during the on-bus surveys. A summary of the responses and the information taken from the on-bus surveys were also detailed in an appendix to the report.
The report set out options for Members’ consideration together with anticipated savings. The recommendations from the Route & Branch Group would be further considered by Transportation Advisory Group on 5 March 2015. It was proposed that the Council’s Cabinet would consider whether to implement any service reductions recommended by the Route & Branch Group.
Following the consultation, negotiations had taken place with Wilts & Dorset and Yellow Buses to discuss opportunities to make savings whilst minimising the impact on passengers. In particular, the bus operators were asked about the possible commercial operation of routes currently provided through subsidy.
Wilts & Dorset had asked that any service changes coincide with its provisional timetable change date of 24 May 2014. This would enable the Company to include the revised timetables in its new timetable book to support passenger awareness. Such changes needed to be registered with the Traffic Commissioner giving 56 days notice. This meant that a final decision on any service changes would need to be notified by 27 March 2015. In view of this, it was proposed that Cabinet would consider the Transportation Advisory Group’s recommendations as an urgent item at its meeting on 24 March 2015.
The net cost of providing subsidised bus services in 2013/14, including all staffing and overheads, was £758,000 per annum. Any reductions to the bus subsidy budget would support the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan.
The report identified specific routes with detailed information on the results of the consultation. Members considered the following proposals:
Proposal / Expected Impact / SavingRoute ONE Fares Increase (not included in the consultation)
#Estimated net saving after taking into account increased concessionary travel claims / Not significant / £15,000 (£2,000)#
Route 50 Mondays to Saturdays (Winter)
*Go South Coast would continue to operate this service without Borough of Poole funding / None* / £18,000
Route 50 Sundays (Winter)
*Go South Coast would continue to operate this service without Borough of Poole funding / None* / £3,000
Route 20 Mondays to Saturdays and Route 52 Mondays to Saturdays (Winter)
These options required a route change to the 20 service in the Lilliput area to reduce the duplication with route 52 / Moderate
High / Option 1: £16,200
Option 2:
£28,000
Route 32
Withdraw Saturday service
Retain service on 3 days only – Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays / Moderate
High / £5,600
£24,000
Route 744 – withdraw school service / High / £11,000
Route 36 – withdrawal of Borough of Poole support / High / £9,500
Route 128
Retain service on 3 days only – Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays
Withdraw the complete service / High
Very High / £9,500
£21,600
Route 445 – withdraw school service / High / £27,700
Route 15 – withdraw support for last return journey on Mondays to Fridays plus the Saturday service. / High / £30,500
Route 462 – withdraw school service / Very High / £28,000
With regard to Routes 20 and 52, Councillor Mrs Stribley suggested amending the proposed alternative route for Route 20 (Yellow Buses) by accessing Broadwater Avenue, Pottery Road and Elgin Road then joining Sandbanks Road. This would have the effect of providing a bus service to residents of the Broadwater Estate and a bus stop near the doctors’ surgery at the junction of Sandbanks Road and Elms Avenue. John McVey suggested that this would need to be discussed with the bus company before a decision could be made.
Members considered that reducing the services identified as Not Significant, None and Moderate would provide financial savings with little or no adverse effect on residents. However, it was felt that the proposals ranked High or Very High would have serious effects on resident/passengers and could not be supported by the Working Group.
In regard to the withdrawal of the Saturday service on Route 32, Members felt that this was a valuable service to areas that would be left without a bus service including the Merley/Canford Magna area and if possible should be retained.
RECOMMENDED that the Transport Advisory Group and Cabinet be advised that this Working Group
(i)Supports changes to the following routes/savings:
- Route ONE Fares Increase (not included in the consultation)£ 2,000
- Route 50 Mondays to Saturdays (Winter)£18,000
- Route 50 Sundays (Winter) £ 3,000;
(ii)The Head of Transportation Services carry out further discussions with the relevant bus company concerning the suggested amendment to Route 20 with a saving of £16,200 (Option 1)
and:
(iii)The Portfolio Holder be advised that whilst not fully supporting the withdrawal of the Saturday Service of Route 32 with a saving of £5,600, this Working Group would accept its removal if financial savings required it.
Chairman