Agenda item

3.1

The Lord Mayor (Councillor Gail Smith) reported that six petitions and questions from five members of the public had been received prior to the published deadline for submission of petitions and questions for this meeting. Representations were to be made on behalf of the petitioners on five of the six petitions and the other petition would be received in the absence of a speaker. One further petition was to be debated at the end of the item, and this was referred to at item 4(b) on the agenda for the meeting.

3.2

Petitions

3.2.1

Petition Requesting the Council to Give Consideration to the Provision of Burial Sites for the Muslim Community as part of the Local Plan Process

The Council received a joint electronic and paper petition containing 4,459 signatures, requesting the Council to give consideration to the provision of burial sites for the Muslim community as part of the Local Plan Process.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Ibrar Hussain. Mr Hussain stated that there was one main Muslim burial site at Shiregreen. He said there was an issue with Darnall and Tinsley Park as the cemeteries were full. He stated that due to the pandemic and the growth of the community these burial sites were almost full. Mr Hussain said he had spoken with Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed, who had agreed that the sites were filling up quickly. Mr Hussain stated that he was requesting a long-term framework to support burial sites for the Muslin community. He asked that this issue be taken to an upcoming Committee. He said 72 hours’ notice was currently required for a burial, which he said was unacceptable. Mr Hussain asked that this issue be included in the Local Plan. He thanked Councillors across the political parties for their support.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Alison Teal (Executive Member for Sustainable Neighbourhoods, Wellbeing, Parks and Leisure). Councillor Teal thanked Mr Hussain for bringing this petition. She stated there were 4 specific burial sites for the Muslim community. She agreed that the Council needed to find new sites. Councillor Teal stated the Council was going to set up a stakeholder group and would be taking a multi-faith approach. She said she had been informed that there were more staff receiving training to use diggers in order to provide plots in a time sensitive manner. She invited Mr Hussain to be part of the stakeholder group. She said the Council currently had 6 years of provision; however, she agreed a longer-term strategy was needed. Councillor Teal stated she was speaking to colleagues in Property Services to ensure land was available.

3.2.2

Petition Requesting the Council to Reconsider the Policy Regarding the Age Limit of Taxis

The Council received a joint electronic and paper petition containing 117 signatures, requesting the Council to reconsider the policy regarding the age limit of taxis.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Ibrar Hussain. Mr Hussain stated thatdue to the proposed introduction of the Clean Air Zone, in September, 2022, taxi drivers were requesting an extension to the current age limit of nine years for private hire vehicles and 15 years for hackney carriage vehicles. He added that there was also a shortage of newer vehicles on the market, namely Euro 4 and 6, due to a missing electronic chip, as well as the price of such vehicles being around 60% higher at the present time. Mr Hussain was also requesting that the age limit of such vehicles, on entry to the trade, be increased from five years to six years.  He stated that many taxi drivers were already facing financial difficulties after the Covid-19 pandemic, and needed urgent assistance from the Council.    

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Paul Wood (Executive Member for Housing, Roads and Waste Management). Councillor Wood thanked Mr Hussain for bringing this petition, and stated that he would bring his concerns to the attention of the Licensing Service, and respond to Mr Hussain at the earliest possible opportunity.

3.2.3

Petition Requesting the Council not to Change the Bus Lane Times on Abbeydale Road

The Council received an electronic petition containing 483 signatures, requesting the Council not to change the bus lane times on Abbeydale Road.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Richard Hennessey. Mr Hennessey stated that it was solely the 12-hour bus lane element of the wider package of proposed highway measures that he was objecting to. He stated that he and his wife ran a therapy business on Abbeydale Road, and their premises were used by around 40 other therapists. They provided therapy for people suffering from both physical and mental issues. Many other business owners on Abbeydale Road had expressed their objections to the proposed 12-hour bus lane, mainly on the basis that customers would find it difficult to access their premises. He stated that many people were forced to drive to the shops/businesses, for health and other reasons, specifically his clients.  

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport). Councillor Johnson thanked Mr Hennessey for bringing this petition, and stated that it was important that, as part of the consultation, the Council found out the precise impact of the proposal on businesses on Abbeydale Road. He accepted that the present bus service in the city was not good enough, and encouraged Mr Hennessey to submit his comments as part of the consultation exercise.

3.2.4

Petition Requesting the Council to Enforce Parking Restrictions and Bus Lanes on Abbeydale Road and London Road Before Resorting to Increasing Bus Lane Opening Times on Abbeydale Road

The Council received an electronic petition containing 38 signatures, requesting the Council to enforce parking restrictions and bus lanes on Abbeydale Road and London Road before resorting to increasing bus lane opening times on Abbeydale Road.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Elaine Bird. Ms Bird stated that the petition related specifically to the section of London Road, from St. Mary’s Gate to Sharrow Vale Road, and that the lack of regular enforcement of current parking restrictions on this section of London Road was resulting in very slow traffic flow, both in and out of the city centre. In addition, there were a high number of illegally parked cars, many of them idling, and parked at bus stops, thereby contributing to increased pollution levels, which affected residents who lived in the area, as well as people walking or cycling through the area. Ms Bird made reference to the fact that the Council must have licensed the many takeaways/restaurants on London Road, therefore must have been aware of the potential parking problems. She stated that the petitioners were also objecting to the increase in parking, stopping and loading restrictions on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road, stating that if such restrictions on the small section of London Road could not be enforced adequately, there would be wider problems if such further restrictions were to be introduced.  

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport). Councillor Johnson thanked Ms Bird for bringing this petition, and stated that he shared the views expressed with regard to illegal parking on this section of London Road, and the resulting increase in pollution levels in the area. He stated that the comments raised would be considered as part of the consultation exercise.

3.2.5

Petition Requesting the Council to Reconsider the Proposed 12-Hour Bus Lane Restrictions on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road

The Council received a petition containing 158 signatures, requesting the Council to reconsider the proposed 12-hour bus lane restrictions on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Nighat Basharat. She stated that the bus lane proposals would likely result in several businesses being forced to close, which would subsequently result in job losses and the loss of vital services for the local community. Residents were very concerned at the potential loss of independent businesses on Abbeydale Road, which formed part of the multi-cultural community in this area. Many businesses on Abbeydale Road had already faced huge challenges as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the recent wave of the pandemic continued to bring uncertainty for business owners.  She stated that there were issues with the effectiveness of the local bus service, and all Sheffield residents wanted a reliable and affordable service. A number of business owners were not aware of the bus lane proposals, and were requesting an extension to the consultation period.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport). Councillor Johnson thanked Ms Basharat for bringing this petition, and stated that he appreciated the difficult circumstances being faced by business owners on Abbeydale Road. He stated that the Council needed to look at ways in which it could assist the business owners. 

3.2.6

Petition Requesting the Council to Reduce Council Tax

The Council received an electronic petition containing six signatures, requesting the Council to reduce Council Tax.  There was no speaker for this petition.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Cate McDonald (Executive Member for Finance and Resources).  The Lord Mayor requested that Cllr McDonald provide a written response to the organiser of the petition.

3.3

Public Questions

3.3.1

Public Questions Regarding the Sheffield Clean Air Zone

Graham Jones asked the following question:

“The Sheffield Clean Air Zone has a focus on the city centre.

Some residential areas, including Burngreave outside the city centre already suffer from illegally high levels of air pollution.  The CAZ is forecast to actually increase pollution on some of Burngreave’s roads through the anticipated displacement of polluting vehicles.

What immediate steps will the Council take to reduce the public health hazards caused by the injustice of deliberately diverting polluting traffic through one of the most disadvantaged areas of the city?”

In response, Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport) referred to the Firvale area of the city as a prime example of why action on pollution was necessary.  He stated that Firvale has some of the worst levels of air pollution due to the fact that the area was situated in a dip with high levels of transport with many bus routes passing through, many taxis and also two schools, a hospital and densely packed housing area with many poor people living there.  He said that there was a misapprehension that the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) would make it worse for people when in fact it would make it better for that area of the city. The geography of Sheffield meant that the inner ring road was where the measurement for air quality was taken and where the cameras had been sited to enforce the proposed Zone.  The main thing was to introduce the CAZ to pave the way for taxi drivers to obtain Government grants to enable them to upgrade their vehicles, as well as to provide bus companies with access to grants so that they would be in a position upgrade their fleets.  Over time, levels of air pollution should go down if the taxis and buses clean up their vehicles.  Councillor Johnson acknowledged that there was a risk of displacement, with some drivers avoiding passing through the Zone so as not to incur a charge, but this was likely to be modest and short term given that private vehicles would be exempt from charges. There had been an argument to do nothing at all.  If this scheme had been introduced without Government legislation, things would have been very different.  The choice was to either introduce the clean air zone to tackle air pollution or do nothing at all and the Council was committed to tackling air pollution in and around the city.

3.3.2

Public Question Regarding the Streets Ahead Contract

Russell Johnson asked the following question:

In July 2021, in answer to a public question of mine, Councillor Paul Wood agreed that the part of the Streets Ahead Contract Clause 6.38 that requires the felling of 17,500 street trees would be deleted / removed from the Contract. The response was reported in the Yorkshire Post.  My question: would the Leader please confirm that this has been actioned? 

Mr. Johnson went on to ask additional questions about the reputation of the Council, which he stated he had submitted to the Council, but he was informed by the Lord Mayor that these had not been received for this meeting.  He was informed that the additional questions he was asking were directed towards the Leader of the Council who had, unfortunately, been forced to leave the meeting due to his wife being taken ill.  Mr. Johnson was informed that if there had been an omission of further questions on the part of the Council, this would be investigated and acted upon.  As such, the question received, and asked, regarding the Streets Ahead Contract would receive a reply.

In response to that question, Councillor Paul Wood (Executive Member for Housing, Roads and Waste Management) stated that he had sent an email to Mr. Johnson detailing the position at the present time.  He added that he did liaise with Councillor Douglas Johnson regarding the issue of tree maintenance and confirmed that this matter was looked at on a regular basis.  As regards the contract clause relating to the felling of trees, Councillor Wood stated that this issue would be picked up by the Council’s legal service in conjunction with other changes being made to the contract, which should be concluded in the near future, and he undertook to inform Mr. Johnson when the contract changes had been completed.

3.3.3

Public Questions Regarding the Climate Emergency

Sam Wakeling asked the following questions:

This meeting marks three years since the Council declared a climate emergency. The Council had taken scientific advice in relation to carbon budgets, but the changes which that advice would require have not been seen in any policy, actions or public communications from the Council.  How much more time do senior councillors and officials need or does the continuing blah blah blah demonstrate that they are neither willing or competent to act to protect life in Sheffield and around the world? Who will offer an apology, or demonstrate repentance, for this breach of trust? Will the council leadership resign, and when will the long-promised citizens assembly be established as a step to begin to repair our shattered democracy?

In response, Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport) said that in his opinion this was not the time for anyone in the Council’s leadership to resign but stated that there had been changes within the Council and within the city.  The climate emergency was formally declared by the Council and people have been working hard since then to keep pushing that agenda.  He said he had been working with a national body to try and bring some funding into the city to promote engagement with the public.  He said more and more people were talking about the climate and the need for action.  There was no quick fix at a time when a quick fix was needed, which was of concern.  He hoped to keep pushing forward on the big things that needed to be addressed, two of which were the subject of discussion at this meeting, with one of the biggest emitters of carbon being in domestic heating and the other being road transport.  There were plans for a radical transformative approach to public transport but there was a lot of reaction and hostility to outline proposals, as there were balances to strike between improved public transport and promotion of public health whilst needing to protect the livelihoods of individuals. He said that later on during the meeting, the matter of a more radical approach to home insulation would be discussed, with the aim of securing net zero consumption homes in large numbers across the city.

3.3.4

Public Questions Regarding the Council’s Disposal of Unused Land at Walshaw Road, Worrall

Robin Hughes asked the following questions:

This question concerns the disposal of a small piece of unused land owned by the Council at Walshaw Road, in the village of Worrall. A developer has approached Property and Regeneration Services asking to buy the land. They wish to purchase the land in order to create an access road to a proposed housing development, so as to avoid using an alternative that would require the demolition of a historic 18th century farmhouse and barn and impact the setting of listed buildings. The developer had previously been refused planning permission for that demolition, the Council indicating clearly that it considered the use of the Council's land to be the preferred alternative. The developer did not appeal the decision, but instead sought to buy the land from the Council, in line with the Council's wishes.

The response from Property and Regeneration Services was that they preferred to await the outcome of any appeal that the developer might make. This reply was only made two months after the deadline for appeals had passed, and it was no longer possible for the developer to appeal, which in any case they showed no intention of doing.

So, given:

(1) The objective in the Council's Land and Property Plan to dispose of surplus land in a timely manner;

(2) The objective in the Council's Land and Property Plan to act as ‘one’ council and to ensure all estate decisions are taken with the wider interests of the Council in mind;

(3) The Council's statutory duty under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Section 66(2) to have regard to the desirability of preserving features of special architectural or historic interest, and in particular, listed buildings, in the exercise of its powers of disposal;

(4) The clear preference expressed by both Members and officers; and

(5) The existence of a ready and willing buyer for surplus Council land;

Will the Council immediately enter into negotiations to sell the land?

Please can the Council also explain:

(1) Why the developer was invited to make an appeal, a potentially expensive procedure for the Council, two months after it was no longer possible for such an appeal to be made?

(2) How it is possible for a department of the Council to act so as effectively to thwart a previous decision by elected Members?

In response, Councillor Cate McDonald (Executive Member for Finance and Resources) stated that there was a complicated series of events to this issue.  She said that in selling Council land, there was a need to ensure that best consideration was obtained, and schemes would be built out in a timely manner once planning had been approved.  She said that the Council was in active discussions with the developer about alternative access to the site and the sale of Council owned land. The Council will seek to conclude these discussions before determining the correct course of action for the planning application.

3.3.5

(NOTE: A question which had been submitted by Duncan Seraphim, but which was not asked at the meeting, would receive a written response from the relevant Executive Member).

3.4

Petition Requiring Debate: Opposing Proposed Extensions to Bus Lane Restrictions on Ecclesall and Abbeydale Road

3.4.1

The Council received an electronic petition containing over 6,750 signatures opposing the plans put forward by Connecting Sheffield to extend bus lane operation times to 12 hours, remove parking and create a red route on Ecclesall Road and Abbeydale Road.

3.4.2

The Council's Petitions Scheme required any petition containing over 5000 signatures to be the subject of debate at the Council meeting.

3.4.3

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Nasar Raoof, who stated that the proposals would have an adverse effect on a number of businesses on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road. Business owners were upset, stressed and angry at the proposals. Mr Raoof referred specifically to the impact on his post office business on Ecclesall Road, indicating that having red lines outside his premises would mean that Royal Mail, delivery companies and vulnerable customers who were forced to use the car, would no longer be able to park outside, or near the post office. The post office, as well as many other businesses, had already suffered financially due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and these proposals would make the situation much worse for them. Mr Raoof referred to a recent visit by Councillor Douglas Johnson to a number of businesses on Ecclesall Road, to listen to their concerns, then expressed his frustration at Councillor Johnson’s subsequent announcement that the Council would not be amending any of the proposals. Mr Raoof stated that he had been forced to change careers, from a taxi driver to a postmaster, as a result of the pandemic, and that he had invested everything, including his children’s savings and inheritance, into his business. He did not believe that the proposed 12-hour bus lane proposals were proportionate or fair.

3.4.4

Councillor Douglas Johnson (Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport), in responding to the petition, stated that it was important to consider, and balance up, the comments received as part of the consultation on the proposals.  He stated that the Council would use the outcome of the initial consultation to bring forward more detailed proposals for further consultation at a later date. He encouraged people to make suggestions as to their specific circumstances and needs, as part of the consultation, and further decisions would be made based on the comments received.

3.4.5

Due to the absence of Councillor Tim Huggan (Shadow Executive Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport) at the meeting, Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed (Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group) spoke.  He thanked the petitioners for attending the meeting, and putting forward their views on these specific proposals, and expressed his concern at the possibility of independent traders losing their livelihoods if the bus lane proposals were implemented. Despite comments made by Councillor Douglas Johnson, he believed it was the responsibility of the Council to look at the potential economic impact that the bus lane proposals would have on businesses on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road, prior to drafting up such proposals. Councillor Mohammed considered that some of the proposals would be effective, but stressed that the bus lane proposals were more than likely to put yet further pressure on traders, who were already struggling in the current economic climate.

3.4.6

Councillor Bryan Lodge thanked Mr Raoof for his passionate speech, and believed that the Council needed to listen seriously to the comments he raised.  He also agreed that there were some positive changes contained in the set of proposals.

3.4.7

Councillor Andrew Sangar thanked the petitioners for attending the meeting to present their petitions relating to the proposals, and stated that he had also walked around Ecclesall Road to talk to those traders who were likely to be affected by the proposals, and noted the strength of feeling amongst them.  He acknowledged the long shopping history on both Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road, and more specifically, the difficulties faced by independent traders in both shopping areas over the last few years.  Councillor Sangar stresses that there was a need for the Council to work with the traders to ensure that both roads continued as thriving shopping centres. He did not believe that the implementation of a 12-hour bus lane would help with this, and believed that the Council needed to start working more closely with, and listen to the views of, local residents and local businesses.  He believed the Council should concentrate on developing the other bus priority measures, and remove the 12-hour bus lane element, which would hopefully help to improve the bus service for the people of Sheffield.

3.4.8

Councillor Ruth Milsom thanked the petitioners for raising their concerns regarding the proposed 12-hour bus lanes, and believed that the submission of such petitions should not have been necessary. She also believed that business owners on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road should not have been forced to suffer such alarm and anxiety, and considered that the Council should have talked to them prior to announcing such proposals, as well as offering assurances to them that their views would form part of the final plans.  Councillor Milsom stated that the current bus service in Sheffield was inadequate, and that removing car parking spaces would have a major adverse impact on business owners’ ability to trade.  

3.4.9

Councillor Paul Turpin welcomed the engagement of the public in terms of the petitions, and hoped that, by working with local residents and businesses in the areas, a satisfactory resolution could be found.  He believed that changes were required in order to improve the bus service in the city, and that implementing 12-hour bus lanes on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road would help to improve connectivity and reliability, air quality and safety for cyclists and pedestrians. Councillor Turpin did not believe that there was any evidence to prove that the bus lane proposals would result in business closures.

3.4.10

Councillor Mohammed Mahroof stated that accusations were already being made that the Council was “anti-business”, and that the bus lane proposals would only exacerbate such claims. He referred to problems already being faced by independent traders on Ecclesall Road, and stated that the proposals would make things much worse. Councillor Mahroof quoted approximate figures in terms of average rent and rates for small businesses on Ecclesall Road, as well as utility and employee costs, highlighting the financial difficulties they were facing. He stated that there had been positive signs of recovery in the business sector on Abbeydale Road, and such proposals would have a major adverse effect. He had been contacted by many independent traders, who had informed him that they relied on customers being able to park outside, or close to, their premises.

3.4.11

Councillor Lewis Chinchen thanked the petitioners, and stated that he strongly opposed the proposals to extend the bus lane operating times on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road. He believed such proposals would make it more difficult for traders, customers and delivery firms, to park outside or close to the premises.  Councillor Chinchen stated that the Council needed to do everything it could to support local businesses, particularly due to adverse effects on the local economy following the Covid-19 pandemic. He did not believe that the proposals would necessarily help to improve connectivity and reliability of the bus service as the bus lanes were already in operation during the most congested times of the day.  Councillor Chinchen stated that he supported many of the other Connecting Sheffield proposals, but considered that the Council needed to listen to the views of local traders with regard to the bus lane proposals.

3.4.12

Councillor Abdul Khayum stressed the need for the Council to listen to the views of the petitioners, who were speaking on behalf of many other local residents and businesses on Abbeydale Road and Ecclesall Road.  He believed there was a requirement for the Council to give serious consideration to all the views and comments received as part of the consultation.  Councillor Khayum referred to the financial difficulties already being faced by local businesses due to the pandemic, and considered that their views should be taken seriously.

3.4.13

Councillor Maroof Raouf thanked everyone who had signed the petition, and stated that he considered the bus lane extensions necessary to improve bus times in the city.  He did, however, consider the extension to 12 hours too far, suggesting that they, at least initially, be extended to seven hours – 07:00 to 10:00 hours and 15:00 to 19:00 hours.  Councillor Raouf stressed that no decisions had been taken with regard to the proposals, and that this was the initial consultation. He stated that the Council would continue to listen to the views of local residents and businesses, and make informed decisions based on their views.

3.4.14

Nasar Raoof, in his right of reply, referred to the lack of a business impact assessment, and expressed his thanks to those Council Members who had spoken against the proposed bus lane extensions.  He stated that he and fellow business owners on Ecclesall Road had worked out how the proposal would impact on their businesses, and stressed that despite comments made by some Councillors, there would not be exemptions for all the different companies which delivered to the post office, in terms of being able to park on the red lines. Mr Raoof urged the Council to reconsider the bus lane proposals, not just to save the businesses at the present time, but to also safeguard their future existence.

3.4.15

Councillor Douglas Johnson responded to issues raised during the debate and highlighted the fact that all the Connecting Sheffield proposals were still at consultation stage, and no decisions had yet been made thereon.

3.4.16

The outcome of the debate on the petition was as follows:-

RESOLVED: That this Council refers the petition to the Co-operative Executive for consideration.