Agenda item

4.1

16^th March 2016

4.1.1

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16^th March 2016, were approved as a correct record and, arising therefrom, further to an issue raised by a member of the public (Diana Stimely) regarding information she had received from the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) indicating that, other than proposed changes to Service 72/72A, there were no other planned service changes, Councillor Chris Peace referred to an e-mail all Councillors had received from the SYPTE on 8^th July 2016, setting out details of other planned bus network changes, to take effect from 4^th September, 2016, and queried when such changes would be announced publicly.

4.1.2

The Chair referred to a question from a member of the public, which had been received prior to the meeting.  Annette Quigley questioned what the planned changes were to Services 35 and 70 and when would the SYPTE be consulting local residents on the proposed changes.  In terms of Service 35, Mrs Quigley stated that, as it only ran once an hour, when it was late, or didn’t turn up at all, it caused problems for users, particularly the elderly and disabled.  She queried why the proposed changes had not followed the normal Sheffield Bus Partnership process. 

4.1.3

In response, Stephen Edwards, Executive Director, SYPTE, stated that the changes made in November 2015 had been made as part of a major network review. The changes now referred to (Services 35 and 70), were not deemed as major network changes, therefore would go through the normal Bus Partnership process in terms of communications and consultation.  Allan Riggall (First South Yorkshire), stated that the change to Service 35 (Sheffield to Wincobank) had been replaced by Service 70, with the route being extended from Wincobank through to Meadowhall, and confirmed that there would still be two buses an hour on this route and the changes were an improvement for users, with no loss or reduction in service. 

4.1.4

Dick Proctor, Transport Planning Manager, Sheffield City Council, stated that, in the light of the apparent confusion in terms of the bus changes now referred to, it could be a good time to review the communication sent by the SYPTE and Sheffield Bus Partnership, in the light that it appeared as though some of the recent changes had not gone through the robust process as had been the case in the past.

4.1.5

Councillor Mazher Iqbal, Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Transport, stated that local residents in the Tinsley area had also been confused and frustrated in terms of changes to Service 69, which had resulted in a number of complaints, mainly relating to the reduction of buses per hour, from two to one, being referred to local Ward Councillors.  He commented that, following the major network changes in November 2015, he and other Councillors had been led to believe that there would not be any further major changes for some time, and expressed his dissatisfaction at the apparent lack of consultation with regard to the changes now referred to.  He concluded by stating that, in the light of the problems facing some local residents, some of whom were considered to be isolated, the relevant bus operators should be requested to reconsider the changes.

4.1.6

Stephen Edwards stated that the changes to Service 69 were linked to the planned introduction of the new Service X1, as part of the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) Project, and there had been communication on these changes through the BRT Project Board, which Sheffield City Council and the SYPTE were members of, with discussions being held for several months.

4.1.7

Councillor Paul Wood stated that there had been a large increase in the number of complaints received by Councillors in connection with some bus services, and questioned how the SYPTE planned to make improvements in terms of taking the public’s view into account, and whether there was a need to look at current processes to ensure that customer feedback was fed into the Partnership appropriately.  Mr Edwards stated that he accepted that there may be a need to look at improving dialogue between the different partners.

4.1.8

Kevin Belfield (First South Yorkshire) stated that it was disappointing to hear that so many people were dissatisfied with the recent changes to bus services, particularly as the bus operators had implemented a number of measures to ensure improvements were made with regard to punctuality and reliability, which had been considered to be a positive move.  He referred specifically to changes to Service 38, which would re-introduce a bus service onto a road that became unserved in November, 2015, and would reduce isolation of local residents.  Councillor Abdul Khayum indicated that a number of representations had been received in connection with Service 38.

4.1.9

In response to comments raised by Councillor Ian Auckland, who queried how making a change to an existing hourly service could not be classed as a major change, Allan Riggall stated that, in connection with the changes to Service 69, two-thirds of residents in the Tinsley area would see bus services doubled in that area, which would also include Services 70 and 71 being diverted to serve part of the estate.

4.1.10

Councillor Chris Peace referred to the e-mail sent to Councillors on 8^th July 2016, stating that there was reference to the fact that there could be an impact in terms of the proposed changes, although there were no details of this, neither was there any explanation for the reasons behind each of the proposed changes.  It was stated that all the details with regard to reasons for the changes had been sent to the SYPTE’s Communications Team, and would be referred to Members of the Committee.  Stephen Edwards added that it was apparent that communication with Councillors in respect of the specific changes, had not been as good as it should have, and that the Bus Partnership would review this.

4.1.11

Councillor Lisa Banes raised concerns with regard to certain communities being isolated as a result of recent changes to bus services, namely Service 38 (Meadowhall to Hillsborough), and indicated that the Bus Partnership needed to give more consideration to how the public were able to travel round the City, and not just concentrate on increasing patronage.  Councillor Banes stated that the service link around Longley Hall, which was withdrawn in November 2015, should be replaced, based on the level of customer feedback she had received.  Allan Riggall stated that the latest change reduced isolation that had been created in November 2015, by re-instating a service in part of the estate currently not served.  Longley Hall would continue to have an hourly service to Firth Park, as well as a bus every 10 minutes on Service 97/98.

4.1.12

John Young (Stagecoach Sheffield) stated that the Bus Partnership did not wish to discourage the public providing feedback in terms of bus services.  He added that, following the changes in November 2015, punctuality levels were at their highest ever, and that around 75% of all bus service changes were made to improve punctuality.  There would always be a need for changes to be made, with the majority involving measures to improve punctuality.  It was imperative that operators kept a close watch on this as it was of the utmost importance to passengers. Mr Young stated that he also accepted that there was clearly a need for improved communications in terms of service changes, together with the reasons for them.

4.1.13

Further to queries raised by Councillor Ian Auckland, it was stated that the SYPTE was not able to publish operators’ statistics, for data protection purposes, but would be happy to share such data between the Bus Partnership.  It was agreed that copies of the letters sent in response to the six petitions received by the Council in connection with the bus changes made in November 2015 would be circulated to Members of the Committee.

4.1.14

In response to a query by Councillor Andy Nash, relating to how information was communicated to the public, it was stated that the SYPTE continued to encourage the public to register with the SYPTE to receive email alerts, which would include details of service changes. In addition, details of proposed changes had been advertised at relevant bus stops.

4.1.15

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       notes the information now reported, together with the comments now made and the responses to the questions raised; and

(b)       in the light of the concerns now raised, requests the Sheffield Bus Partnership to:-

(i)         review the changes made to Services 38 and 69, and ensure that proper consultation has been undertaken with the public and local Ward Councillors, in the areas concerned;

(ii)        review the manner in how such changes are relayed to Councillors in an attempt to ensure that the problems and issues now referred to are not repeated;

(iii)       refresh the process within the Partnership with regard to   minor/major changes, communication and sign off; and

(iv)       inform the Committee of the outcome in terms of points (i) to (iii).

4.2

18^th May 2016

4.2.1

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 18^th May 2016, were approved as a correct record