Portsmouth City Borough Council Cabinet Member for Transport Meeting

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

Councillor Graham Heaney asked the following question:

"The Elm Grove/Grove Road South junction safety improvements were approved by the previous Cabinet Member in December 2021 so has the Cabinet Member agreed to the detailed proposals that have been consulted on so work on this scheme can begin?"

The Chair advised that the scheme would require a loss of car parking spaces and therefore the implementation of additional double yellow lines which need a Traffic Regulation Order.   For the TRO to be implemented, it is necessary to carry out a 21-day consultation as part of the statutory process and this consultation has not yet taken place.   When the scheme was first proposed it was not intended that there should be a loss of car parking spaces, but once a detailed analysis of the area was carried out this was the result.  The Chair advised that the TRO will be presented to a Transport decision meeting in the New Year 2024 with the work to follow afterwards.

Abi Kelly, Principal Project Manager, presented the information only report, the purpose of which was to provide an update on the Castle Road TRO 120/2.

Members' Questions

In response to Members' questions, officers clarified:

·         There was a typo in the report at 5.1 - the consultation had run for 21 days, not the extended period stated in the report.

·         A Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO) can remain in place for 18 months.  The TTRO for this scheme was extended twice, having applied to the Secretary of State to do so.  The extensions take the TTRO up to the present time and provide a buffer into the New Year.  It runs out in mid-March 2024.  The works are expected to be completed in early January 2024 when the TRO will be sealed and the TTRO will expire.

Members' Comments

Members considered the scheme had made an enormous positive change to Castle Road.

They wondered if more could be done in the future to promote Castle Road as a tourist attraction.

Members were happy to support the scheme continuing.

Decision

The Cabinet Member for Transport noted the report which was for information only.

Joanne Eldridge, Transport Delivery Lead, presented the report, the purpose of which was to consider the objection to making permanent the experimental one-way (except cyclists) streets on Bonchurch Road and Edgeware Road.

Members' Questions

In response to Members' questions, officers clarified:

·         The last page of the report at appendix C contained a typo in relation to the weighting moving from people to percentages.  The correct figures were:

·         Yellow square box junctions are only used in certain locations and the advice in this area was to use an advisory 'Keep Clear' notice. This will be kept under review and changed should the need arise.

Members's Comments

The Chair advised that Councillor Kimberley Barrett had carried out door to door knocking in the area which showed 78 in favour and 12 against.   The Chair noted that when he had spoken to residents, they have been happy with the changes.

Members were happy to support the scheme.

Decision

The Cabinet Member for Transport:

·         Considered the objection to the making permanent of the experimental one way (except cycles) working in Edgeware Road and Bonchurch Road;

·         Approved that the provisions of the Portsmouth City Council (Bonchurch Road and Edgeware Road)(One-way except Cycles) (No.8) Experimental Traffic Regulation Order 2023 be made permanent.

The confidentiality of Appendix B was upheld.

Martin Lavers, Assistant Director, presented the report, the purpose of which was to seek agreement to enter into a design and build contract to replace the pavement at The Hard Interchange bus apron.

Members' Questions

In response to Members' questions, officers clarified:

·         A layby for dropping of and picking up passengers will be provided but the location had not yet been decided.

·          The non-contractor costs include everything apart from the cost of the repairs that have been carried out to date on the bus apron.  The total amounts shown are what has already been spent including legal fees.

·         A £4.9 million bid in the Capital Programme was agreed in the Budget and it is hoped that the Council should be able to recoup £3million which should zero off the Transport Budget Portfolio Budget of £4.9million.

·         Included in the £650k contingency sum is about 30% on the construction cost.  The sooner the construction is commenced the more confidence there will be on the actual spend figure.

·         There is a financial implication to the Transport Portfolio Capital Programme should the legal challenge fail.  The Council may have to go to its insurers.

·         It was too soon to say if there would be an impact on other schemes.  The legal challenge may take some time.  The implications would be better answered by Chris Ward, Director of Finance and Resources.

·         The legal challenge was currently going through mediation with a time limit of the middle of 2025.  If the mediation fails then it will be taken to Court so it could take a couple of years to resolve.

·         The construction work will commence Autumn 2024 and will take approximately 4 months to complete.  Autumn was chosen to avoid the main summer holiday season to minimise the disruption to bus services.

·         Legal services had checked that the original design company held appropriate insurance, but it was not known if this would still be valid should the company wind up.

·         The preferred bidder for the current scheme was Mildren.

Members' Comments

Members agreed that the work needed to be completed but were concerned regarding the legal challenge and the possibility that the money may not be recouped.  It was suggested that a further joint paper be bought to a Transport Portfolio decision meeting on the legal and financial impacts and risks.

Decision

The Cabinet Member for Transport:

1.    Approved the appointment of Mildren Construction Ltd to undertake the design and build pavement replacement at the bus apron;

2.    Approved that the appointment should take place in advance of the conclusion of the ongoing legal process due to the risk that further delay in the pavement replacement could result in an unplanned substantial failure which would lead to vehicles not being able to access the bus apron.

Electric Vehicle Charging Points Update

The Chair provided an update on the current discussion with the 3 companies responsible for managing and providing the EV charging point situation.

The Chair advised the initial bid for the points was to the Office for Zero Emissions by the City Council.  The four companies involved in the discussions are Southern Electric who are the providers of the electricity, the two companies who installed and run the charge points and Portsmouth City Council who have allowed the use of the road space and light columns.

The Chair noted the surprise of the Council when Southern Electric (SE) contacted them to say they had safety concerns about the points that had been installed by the contractors as some had been in place for several years.  Portsmouth City Council contacted the suppliers of the charging points and passed on the concerns of SE.  The companies carried out inspections to ensure they were, in their view, safe.  However, SE wanted to carry out their own inspections which are still ongoing.  The council is still in discussions with SE to complete these inspections as soon as possible.  SE have advised the council of the legal timescale they have to operate to which is 28 days.  The Council continues to work closely with SE and the other companies to resolve the issue.

The Chair advised that, whilst the charging points are out of operation, the bays could be parked in by non-electric vehicles.  Clear signage and information would be provided once the bays were up and running and were once again only for electric vehicles.

The Chair agreed that once the charging points are back online there would be an investigation and summary about what had happened and to consider lessons learned and this would be bought to a future Transport Portfolio meeting.

It was not known whether there would be any costs for the city council associated with the work being done to resolve the issue.