Decisions

15.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures providing an overview of the public consultation carried out on the Publication Draft Sheffield Plan, including some of the key issues. It also sets out the process for responding to the issues raised and the timetable and process for submitting the Sheffield Plan to the Government for public examination.  

15.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

a)    notes the issues arising from public consultation on the Publication Draft Sheffield Plan;

b)    notes that a ‘schedule of suggested amendments’, compiled in response to the comments on the Publication Draft Sheffield Plan, is to be considered by the Strategy and Resources Committee and full Council prior to submitting the relevant documents to the Government in accordance with recommendation (d) of the decision of full Council dated 14th December 2022 

15.3

Reasons for Decision

15.3.1

Once adopted, the new Sheffield Plan will make a major contribution to the future development of the city and will guide development over the next 15-20 years. It is important that the plan is adopted as soon as possible. 

15.3.2

The documents that are the subject of this report (Part 1: Strategy, Sub-Area Policies and Site Allocations, Part 2: Development Management Policies, Annex A: Site Allocation Schedule, Annex B: Parking Guidelines, Policies Map and Glossary) comprise the draft development plan documents for Sheffield. They were published under Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (as amended). The submission documents will include such documents as fall within the definition at Regulation 17 (as agreed by full Council on 14th December 2022).

15.3.3

The Draft Sheffield Plan represent the Council’s firm proposals for the

development of the city over the period to 2039. The public

consultation, seeking views on the ‘soundness’ of the Plan was a

required stage before the Draft Plan is submitted to the Government for

public examination. Comments received with respect to this

consultation process are currently being reviewed before amendments

are proposed to the Strategy and Resources Committee in August and

full Council in September.

15.3.4

The recommendations reflect earlier decisions taken by full Council on

14th December 2022 for decisions on any desired amendments to the

Plan to be taken by the Strategy & Resources Policy Committee and

then full Council.

15.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

15.4.1

The options available to the Council in terms of proposing amendments

to the Sheffield Plan have already been outlined in paragraph ##

above. This will be a matter for the Strategy & Resources Committee

and full Council to consider.

14.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures that sets out the aims of bringing together all school related Active Travel projects under one team managed by Sheffield City Council to maximise efficiency. We will use funds to enhance active travel in primary schools by commissioning external support from additional project officers to so as to deliver the ModeshiftSTARS award scheme. By expanding the current Modeshift STARS support provision for Sheffield Schools, we would be able to maintain and build on the successes and achievements of 2022 in increasing Active Travel in schools.  

14.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

i.              Approves the use of funding to support the continued delivery of the Active Travel in schools scheme.

ii.            Approves an increase to the total funding for the scheme to £289,960.67.

iii.           Approves the commissioning of additional external staff to support the delivery of the scheme at a cost of £273,460.67. 

14.3

Reasons for Decision

14.3.1

The investment in supporting schools to promote and enable active journeys to school will ultimately help to address the ambitions of Members and delivery against the requests of the Sheffield public to improve safety on the journey to school for all.

14.3.2

The expected benefits from this project are multiple. Including an increase in

safety, and perception of safety, enhancing environmental amenities and

improving health by supporting safe active travel movements.

14.3.3

The programme takes advantage of utilising external funding sources where

possible to deliver impactful change to the transport system, considering

environmental, economic, and societal needs.

14.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

14.4.1

‘Do nothing’ has been considered but is not deemed appropriate.

14.4.2

Without this approval Sheffield will see a drastic reduction in resources. From September, we will go from having a team of three to a single part-time officer working on the project. This is insufficient resource to support Sheffield’s 180 schools in any meaningful way. The impact of this would also include:

• a significant reduction in outputs

• little or no activities delivered in schools.

• a significant reduction in the number of schools engaged in the

project.

• detrimental impact on the strategic running of the project

• unable to build on past success due to lack of resource.

• difficulty in re-engaging with schools in the future once confidence

has been lost in SCC to deliver this project.

13.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures detailing the consultation response to proposals to introduce 20mph speed limits in Westfield, report the receipt of objections to the Speed Limit Order and set out the Council’s response.

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

1.    Approve that the Westfield 20mph Speed Limit Order be made, as advertised, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Objectors will then be informed of the decision by the Council’s Traffic Regulations team and the order implemented on street subject to no road safety issues being identified through a Road Safety Audit (RSA) at the detailed design stage.

2.    Approve the introduction of a part time 20mph limit on Westfield Northway outside Shortbrook Primary School subject to no road safety issues being identified through a RSA at the detailed design stage

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

The adoption of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy established the principle of introducing sign-only 20mph speed limits in all suitable residential areas. Reducing the speed of traffic in residential areas should, in the long term, reduce the number and severity of collisions, reduce the fear of accidents, encourage sustainable modes of travel and contribute towards the creation of a more pleasant, cohesive environment.

13.3.2

Having considered the response from the public and other consultees it is recommended that the 20mph speed limit in Westfield be implemented as, on balance, the benefits of the scheme in terms of safety and sustainability are considered to outweigh the concerns raised.

13.3.3

It is also recommended that a part time 20mph limit on Westfield

Northway outside Shortbrook Primary School be approved.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

In light of the objections received, consideration was given to recommending the retention of the existing speed limit in Westfield. However, such a recommendation would run contrary to the delivery of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy. This would also mean that pedestrian and cyclist safety would not be improved, and this would be detrimental to the Council’s Active Travel ambition and vision of Safer streets in our city.

12.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures detailing the consultation response to proposals to introduce 20mph speed limits in Herdings, report the receipt of objections to the Speed Limit Order and set out the Council’s response.

12.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

Approve that the Herdings 20mph Speed Limit Order be made, as advertised, in

accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Objectors will then be

informed of the decision by the Council’s Traffic Regulations team and the order

implemented on street subject to no road safety issues being identified through a

Road Safety Audit (RSA) at the detailed design stage.

12.3

Reasons for Decision

12.3.1

The adoption of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy established the principle of introducing sign-only 20mph speed limits in all suitable residential areas. Reducing the speed of traffic in residential areas should, in the long term, reduce the number and severity of collisions, reduce the fear of accidents, encourage sustainable modes of travel and contribute towards the creation of a more pleasant, cohesive environment.

12.3.2

Having considered the response from the public and other consultees it is recommended that the 20mph speed limit in Herdings be implemented as, on balance, the benefits of the scheme in terms of safety and sustainability are considered to outweigh the concerns raised.

12.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

12.4.1

In light of the objections received, consideration was given to recommending the retention of the existing speed limit in Herdings. However, such a recommendation would run contrary to the delivery of the Sheffield 20mph Speed Limit Strategy. This would also mean that pedestrian and cyclist safety would not be improved, and this would be detrimental to the Council’s Active Travel ambition and vision of Safer streets in our city.

7.1

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Policy and Democratic Engagement on the Committee’s Work Programme detailing all known, substantive agenda items for forthcoming meetings of the Committee, to enable this committee, other committees, officers, partners, and the public to plan their work with and for the Committee.

7.2

RESOLVED: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:-

1.    Agree that the Committee’s work programme for the meeting of the 19^th July, 2023 as set out in Appendix 1 be agreed, including any additions and amendments identified in Part 1 subject to the removal of the item Future of Green Parking Permits.

2.    Agree that all items listed for consideration at the meeting of the 20^th September, 2023 and those for which no date is set, be reviewed by the committee before being confirmed on the Work Programme.

7.3

Reasons for Decision

7.3.1

To give the committee members an opportunity to consider the direction of the work programme, align it with their key priorities and create a manageable workload for the committee.

7.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

7.4.1

It was determined that the work programme presented by officers did not meet member priorities and required further consideration in terms of the workload of the committee.  

10.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of City Futures on the consultation response to the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order for the Broomhill Shopping Precinct, including the receipt of objections to the Order and the Council’s response.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:-

• Approves that a Traffic Regulation Order be made so as to make permanent the

restrictions within the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order, as advertised and

implemented, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Objectors

will then be informed of the decision by the Council’s Traffic Regulations team and

the order implemented on street.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

Before the intervention was implemented in August 2020, there were a

few issues with the public space at the Broomhill Shopping Precinct. Cars

were often queuing along the A57 to pull into the parking bays causing

congestion. Safety was also a concern insofar as cars were also reversing

out into the main road out of the parking bays and, in addition to this, there

were also issues around the narrow pavement adjacent to the parking

bays. This led to pedestrians often walking down the middle of the road.

10.3.2

Since the changes were implemented the air quality has improved, with

nitrogen dioxide levels decreasing by 14% in the area. If the changes

were made permanent, this would create an opportunity to enhance the

public realm in the area with the additional space (Appendix B). These

enhancements could lead to more people visiting Broomhill and staying

for longer.

10.3.3

The intervention is also a good strategic fit with the objectives within the

Visions and Aspirations for the BBEST Area 2021 such as:

• Encourage economic activity and growth

• Enhance the public realm

• Improve the function of pedestrianised areas

• Improve the environment (including air quality and noise) for

Visitors

10.3.4

Having considered the response from the public and other consultees it is

recommended that the Broomhill ETRO be implemented as, on balance,

benefits of the scheme in terms of safety and sustainability outweigh the

concerns raised.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

Considering the objections received, consideration was given to

recommending the retention of the parking spaces on Fulwood Service

Road. However, such a recommendation could result in many of the

benefits outlined in this report being lost such as improved air quality and

a more attractive environment for pedestrians. As a result of these

benefits being lost more visitors may travel by car, instead of more

sustainable modes, and therefore stay in the area for less time due to the

spaces being free for 20 minutes.

5.1

The Chief Executive submitted a report asking Strategy and Resources Committee to agree a suite of actions and a budget to respond the findings and recommendations of the Sheffield street trees Inquiry, published by Sir Mark Lowcock KCB on 6 March 2023.

The Inquiry report contains detailed findings, observations and 11 recommendations for the Council and their Streets Ahead contractor, Amey.

The Council published a statement on 6 March, welcoming the report, and a further statement on 7 March setting out an initial apology and the intention to implement all recommendations and learn lessons. On 15 March at the Strategy and Resources Committee, the Council made fuller apologies, accepted all the Inquiry’s conclusions and recommendations and asked the Chief Executive to bring a report to this Committee to respond to each of the recommendations. Apologies were repeated at the Extraordinary General Meeting on 10 May and a motion passed which included a request that a timescale for implementation be published no later than the end of June 2023

5.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a) agrees to set aside £200,000 from reserves to cover the remaining costs of the Inquiry and to facilitate the actions to meet its recommendations set out within this report;

(b) agrees the 36 actions (and their accountability and monitoring arrangements) recommended to implement the recommendations of the Sheffield street trees Inquiry, set out within this report and summarised in Annex A;

(c) notes the apologies from Amey and Sheffield Tree Action Groups (STAG);

(d) endorses the bespoke approach to supporting those who were found in breach of the injunctions and ordered by the Court to pay costs;

(e) agrees that there should not be a dispute related compensation scheme;

(f) agrees that improving the standard of roads outstanding from 2018 is a priority for the Council;

(g) notes that the Council has shared the Inquiry response and this report with its auditors and will comply willingly should the auditors choose to recommend further action; and

(h) notes that this report does not recommend commissioning additional reports or investigations into the street trees dispute beyond the work with the Information Commissioner’s Office and the liaison with the Local Government Ombudsman and the Council’s auditors.

5.3

Reasons for Decision

5.3.1

The recommendations will support the ongoing recovery and reconciliation following the dispute, help ensure strong management of the Streets Ahead contract for the next 14 years and support the aims of the Council’s Strategic Framework 2023/24. They will also enable the Council to meet its commitment to accept and have a plan to implement all the Inquiry’s recommendations no later than the end of June 2023.

5.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

5.4.1

The Council has already committed to accepting all the Inquiry’s recommendations and learning lessons. Full Council reiterated and endorsed this through the motion which was passed at the EGM on 10 May.

5.4.2

The actions within the report are the Chief Executive and her team’s advice for how best to implement the Inquiry’s recommendations. There is strong alignment between the actions and the 6-month review of governance, City Goals and the Strategic Framework for 2023/24. As such, the option of rejecting some, or all, of the actions, or recommissioning this work, is not advised and would delay implementation.

11.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director-City Futures detailing the consultation response to the Experimental Traffic Order for Division Street, to report the receipt of objections and set out the Council’s response.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

Approve that the Experimental Traffic Order be made permanent. Objectors will

then be informed of the decision by the Council’s Traffic Regulations team. The

order will be made permanent by way of a Traffic Regulation Order which makes

the provisions of the Experimental Traffic Order permanent, in accordance with the

procedure set out under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

The prohibition of driving on parts of Division Street creates a safer environment for

cyclists on this section of Division Street. Before driving was prohibited, people

could not cycle safely with a high flow of traffic travelling along the route and a lot of

parked cars. The changes made significantly reduce the number of cars travelling

along Division St creating a safer cycling environment. This should help encourage

more people to cycle along the route and through the city centre.

11.3.2

The prohibition of driving on parts of Division Street creates a safer environment for

pedestrians. There is not enough space for groups of pedestrians to stay on the

pavement on the closed section of Division Street. This becomes a safety issue in

busy periods with pedestrians often having to walk on the road, increasing the risk

of conflict with motor vehicles. The changes allow pedestrians to safely walk through

this section of Division St.

11.3.3

Since the changes were implemented, many street cafes along the closed section of Division St have taken the opportunity to offer outdoor seating. This was initially in response to covid restrictions however many have continued to offer this since

restrictions have been eased. This has allowed them to increase their capacity and

improves the local street scene.

The scheme is also a good strategic fit with the key aims of the third core objective

of the Sheffield Transport Strategy (2019):

• Sustainable safety, safe walking and cycling as standard

• Improved air quality and working to manage congestion

• Improving poor health and poor access to jobs and services

11.3.4

Having considered the response from the public and other consultees it is

recommended that the Division Street ETRO be implemented as, on balance,

benefits of the scheme in terms of safety and sustainability outweigh the concerns

raised. It is also recommended that a re-deployable enforcement camera is installed

to enforce restrictions in the pedestrianised area. It is also recommended that a

review of the changes be undertaken once the Kangaroo Works construction has

completed.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

Considering the objections received, consideration was given to recommending the

removal of the modal filters and allowing motor vehicles to drive along all of Division

St again. However, such a recommendation could result in many of the benefits

outlined in the report such as improved safety for cyclists and pedestrians and

space for outdoor seating being lost.

11.4.2

Consideration was also given to implementing a westbound one-way restriction

through the currently pedestrianised section of Division St, keeping half of the road

pedestrianised or for outdoor seating. However, such a recommendation would

increase the flow of traffic travelling along Division St and reduce safety and

accessibility for cyclists.

11.4.3

Consideration was also given to re-instating the original one-way on Westfield

Terrace to southbound. However, such a recommendation would result in traffic

travelling east on Devonshire St having to make a U-turn when at the junction with

Westfield Terrace. This option could be re-assessed once the Kangaroo Works

construction has finished.

11.4.4

Consideration was also given to fully pedestrianizing the section of Division St

between Rockingham St and Westfield Terrace. However, such a recommendation

would remove access to the private car park on Canning St. This option could be re-assessed once the Kangaroo Works construction has finished.

13.1

The Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee Considered a report of the Executive Director for City Futures seeking approval for the Commissioning Strategies associated with two Local Business Support projects funded by UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) with contract values over £250,000.

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee:-

·       Approves the Commissioning Strategies as set out in the Report.

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

In order to deliver a number of large UKSPF projects external support is required that can provide specialist knowledge and capacity.

13.3.2

Without the external services the UKSPF programme will either not be delivered

as approved by Economic Development and Skills Committee and the outputs

and outcomes within Funding Agreements with SYMCA will not be achieved.

This will have a negative impact upon the services being provided to Sheffield

and South Yorkshire based businesses and residents.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

The specialist nature of services and capacity required through the procurement process are not available within the Council. It is not possible to effectively and efficiently deliver UKSPF projects without the procurement of external services.

10.1

The report seeks approval of the Terms of Reference for the Sheffield Diverse

Advisory Business Board from the Economic Development and Skills Policy

Committee.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee:-

1. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Diverse Business Advisory Board.

2. Formally thanks the Business Response Group for their dedication and work during the COVID Pandemic and in co-authoring the Business Recovery Plan.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

To ask Members to approve the Terms of Reference for the Diverse Business Advisory Board.

10.3.2

A do-nothing option is discounted, developing a more diverse Business Board is essential in meeting the recommendations for an equal and enterprising city. To not follow through would pose a risk for Business Sheffield and for the Council more generally in meeting the specific business support recommendations in the REC and its contribution to the wider overarching theme of becoming an antiracist city.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

Continuation of the BRG – This group was highly effective during COVID, meeting weekly to ensure business organisations develop and promote the range of support available. However this board was not representative and attendance has waned in the post COVID period. The BRG have discussed this proposal and agree that a new board is needed.

10.4.2

A new group made up of business organisations only – This would recreate the BRG, with a broader membership, however this would not meet the recommendations in the REC as would not lead to a diverse set of businesses and business leaders around the table.

10.4.3

Not having a business board at all – It is important that EDS Committee and the Council have an effective way to liaise with and hear from businesses. The Council’s one year plan and delivery plan, seek to be a good partner to Business in the City, and this is an effective way to do this.

11.1

The Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of City Futures seeking;

·       Approval on the proposals for the use of UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) – People and Skills allocation for Sheffield

·       Noting that Sheffield City Council will become the Accountable Body on behalf of other South Yorkshire Local Authorities for a proportion of the activity funded by UKSPF following the entering of a funding agreement with SYMCA to enable the delivery of the UKSPF programme in Sheffield and South Yorkshire.

·       Approval to spend with the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) on employment support activity and to spend on training in response to community and employers’ identified needs.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee:-

a)  Note that Sheffield City Council proposes:

      i.         As Accountable Body for activity funded by UKSPF (strands 1 & 2 activity) for an overall regional value of £7.65m, in line with the approval by the Finance Sub-Committee on 7th November 2022;

     ii.         As Accountable body, to enter into funding agreements with SYMCA to enable the delivery of the UKSPF programme in Sheffield and South Yorkshire as set out in this report; and

    iii.         that the scope of the bid is developed in line with the South Yorkshire Investment Plan for SYMCA and a SY-wide delivery model

b) Approve the use of £3.94m of UKSPF People and Skills funding and £922,520 match funding totalling £4.87m in Sheffield, to be used for the activity described and set out in the table in section 4.2 of this report, Note that this includes

      i.         £1.89m commissioning with the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) on employment support activity (with no individual contract exceeding a value of £250,000)

     ii.         £560,000 on training in response to community and employers’ identified needs, (with no individual contract exceeding a value of £250,000).

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

The underlying benefit that this proposal brings to secure external funding to

deliver a programme of activity in Sheffield that will cover:

- Addressing the cost-of-living crisis

- Support the community sector

- Support to the cultural and visitor economy

- Improvements to the built environment and reduce carbon emissions

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

Not applying for SPF funding was considered. However, this would result in

most Council run core employment and skills programmes stopping altogether

and result in withdrawal of funding for the VCS and the communities they serve.

Due to a shared understanding with SYMCA of the local labour market

challenges, the Investment Plan submitted aligns well with the local needs and

therefore the activity we seek to deliver fits with the programme of funding.

11.4.2

Alternative models were considered but would have less alignment with the

themes developed in the SYSPF Investment Plan and might not be supported

by SYMCA. Alternative funding has been attained or is being sought for other

activity which does not fit with the investment plan.

11.1

The Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of City Futures seeking approval to the prosed scope of a bid for Year 2 and 3 UKSPF funding from South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA) to create a programme to further build Sheffield’s reputation as a distinctive, diverse, cultural, city break destination.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee:-

Agree the proposed scope of the Year 2 and 3 UK Shared Prosperity Fund cultural destinations bid, including submission of Place Pilot bid to Arts Council.

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

UKSPF Year 2 and 3 provides a valuable opportunity to channel welcome additional resources into culture and city marketing, to give benefits to the visitor economy, wellbeing, cohesion and city reputation.

11.3.2

The proposed activities within the cultural destinations programme set out above are based on tried and tested methodologies including the previous ACE-funded Cultural Destinations programme 2016-18 (Lush Spectra, Strong Language, Mausoleum of the Giants) and the learning from Year 1 UKSPF. We want to embed innovative cultural activity into the city’s calendar, and a two-year funding allocation following on from UKSPF Year 1 allows this to happen.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

The Council could decide not to apply for Year 2 and3 UKSPF funding. This would shut down an opportunity for additional resources which can provide city vibrancy, reasons to visit and support for Sheffield’s cultural sector.

11.4.2

We could not seek to leverage further funding, and not apply for Place Partnership Match Funding. This would have the advantage of enabling earlier delivery as the bid needs to be developed and submitted, but it would also considerably extend the impact and leverage of the SPF monies.

9.1

The Economic Development and Skills Policy Committee considered a report of the Executive Director City Futures proposing that Sheffield City Council’s Marketing Sheffield service submits an application for Local Visitor Economy Partnership (LVEP) accreditation in June 2023 via the VisitEngland formal process.  

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:

1. Agrees that Marketing Sheffield leads on the submission of an LVEP application to VisitEngland.

2. Agrees for Sheffield City Council to be established as the accountable body on

behalf of South Yorkshire in delivering the requirements

3. Notes the need to establish an operational structure which supports the delivery of the LVEP and seeks SYMCA financial resources as a mechanism for creating the required structure.

4. Notes the development of Sheffield’s draft Destination Management Plan

required as part of the accreditation process 

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

Inclusion in the national and regional tourism agenda, and opportunities to access match-funded or grant-funded tourism campaigns will be lost if Sheffield does not pursue LVEP status as part of a South Yorkshire partnership approach

9.3.2

Sheffield would lose strategic support from Visit England, involvement in national strategy development or involvement in Visit Britain/Visit England marketing and other activity.

9.3.3

There is no alternative existing structure across South Yorkshire that could lead such a partnership and therefore the subregion would not be part of the new national framework.

9.3.4

Marketing Sheffield has achieved much success even within tight budgets. The small but highly experienced team has achieved many successes through creative work with partners which could be scaled up with the right support. LVEP status will help us capitalise on this work for the benefit of the Sheffield visitor economy for 2023 and beyond.

9.3.5

It will create a catalyst for more significant private sector engagement

9.3.6

It will allow Sheffield, via the South Yorkshire LVEP, to apply for national funding schemes managed by VisitEngland as and when they become available

9.3.7

It will allow for strategic support from VisitEngland, involvement in national strategy development and involvement in VisitBritain VisitEngland marketing and other activities.

9.3.8

It allows Sheffield to lead the way with South Yorkshire on developing national and international audiences and reputation

9.3.9

It will strengthen SCCs relationship with SYMCA and the local authorities in this area by providing expertise and access to the national framework

9.3.10

It is the first step to addressing the challenges within the current Marketing Sheffield structure (financial and capacity).

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

The alternative decision-making option would be for each Policy Committee where a project was taking place to agree the business case of the project and then approval to draw down funding is sought from Strategy and Resources Budget, which due to timescales of reporting cycles, would be a lengthier process. 

9.1

The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director of City Futures on the consultation response to proposals to introduce a Controlled Parking Zone in Park Hill. The report detailed objections to the Traffic Regulation Order and set out the Council’s response and recommendations.

9.2

RESOLVED: That the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:-

·         Welcomes the development of a parking scheme, however it does not approve the officer recommendations

·         Requests that a new scheme is designed and developed in consultation with local residents and all appropriate stakeholders

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The proposed Park Hill controlled parking zone will:

• Improve conditions for local businesses residents by ensuring the availability of convenient parking spaces for residents, business and visitors and giving them a greater level of priority where appropriate through issuing permits;

• Improve access through the area and loading and unloading opportunities for all vehicles (especially larger ones) by removing parking at or near junctions; and

• Improve conditions for sustainable travel modes.

9.3.2

Specific responses to the points raised in the feedback to the consultation are addressed earlier in this report. On balance, it is considered that the Council should proceed with the implementation of the Park Hill Controlled Parking Zone in the

amended form set out in Appendix C to this report as its benefits are considered to outweigh the concerns raised.

9.3.3

It is good practice to review any highway scheme after it has been active for a period of time to ensure that it is delivering on the benefits expected. Parking behaviours are constantly changing post covid so reviewing the boundary of the scheme after around 12 months will ensure that the scheme on site is the best scheme to achieve our objectives.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Consideration was given to limited waiting, without charging (e.g. 4

hours, no return within 2 hours), with permits considered where

appropriate. However, this was discounted for the following

reasons:

• Enforcement of the restrictions are more resource intensive

and time consuming;

• Puts pressure on existing enforcement resources as limited

extra income through enforcement may not cover additional

costs;

• Lack of consistency of approach with other areas of the

City;

• Residents and businesses could feel that they are being

charged to park in the area where visitors (and potentially

commuters) may not; and

• There is anecdotal evidence from schemes around the City

that suggest that people may move their vehicles part way

through the day to avoid the 4-hour restrictions.

10.1

South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority are making £150,000 available to Sheffield City Council with the requirement that it must be spent directly on sustainable food provision.

It is proposed that the SYMCA funding is used to accelerate the implementation of the Food Access Plan. Specifically, it will be used to develop sustainable local food sourcing infrastructure by:

1.     Investing in S6 food bank to give them capacity to purchase food at scale on behalf of other food banks and food initiatives in the city. This will benefit the food projects who take part by reducing the cost of the food they require and reducing the time they must spend sourcing food. In turn this will increase the resilience of the emergency food relief system.

2.     Investing in Food Works to enable them to scale up their surplus food sourcing and develop a pantry model. Food Works pantries will be rolled out in multiple locations across the city in partnership with community organisations. This will increase the number of people in our most disadvantaged communities that are able to access affordable nutritious food.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Finance Committee approves the proposed funding allocations as set out in paragraph 1.16 of the report.

10.3

Reasons for decisions

10.3.1

Supporting food purchasing in bulk will build the resilience of the emergency food system in Sheffield saving food banks time and money.

10.3.2

The expansion of Food Works pantries allows us to deliver on the commitments of the Food Access Plan to stimulate a more diverse range of food provision and support. Delivery of food pantries via Food Works rather than a national operator means that we are investing in local infrastructure and resilience. It also means that the model can be developed responsively and collaboratively, taking into account then eeds of the community partner organisations who will host the pantries.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

Provide funding to The Bread and Butter Thing to implement 5 mobile pantries across Sheffield. Whilst it was noted that the initiative has many positive attributes and would bring benefits to communities it was felt that investing in local infrastructure and developing models of support that respond to the needs of local food relief initiatives would bring greater long term benefit.

10.4.2

Continue the emergency food store that is currently being hosted by S6 food bank on behalf of Sheffield City Council. This would not meet the SYMCA requirement for the development of sustainable food provision as it would mean purchasing food on a one off basis rather than investing in capability and infrastructure.

10.4.3

Divide the funding amongst existing food banks This would not meet the SYMCA requirement for the development of sustainable food provision as would likely be utilised for food and ongoing running costs. There will be other grants schemes in the near future that could be used in this way and we will ensure food banks are supported to submit applications.

9.1

This report provides details of proposed changes to the existing Capital Programme as brought forward in Month 01 2023/24.

In addition, it provides details of the changes to the capital programme required as part of the year end close down process requiring formal ratification.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Finance Committee:-

(a)  approves the proposed additions and variations to the Capital Programme listed in Appendix 1;

(b)  approves the budget adjustments required as part of the financial year end close down procedure as detailed in Appendix 2;

(c)   approves the acceptance of grant funding as identified in Appendix 3; and

(d)  approves the council entering into agreements to provide funding to third parties as identified in Appendix 4.

9.3

Reasons for decisions

9.3.1

The proposed changes to the Capital Programme will improve the services to the people of Sheffield.

9.3.2

To formally record changes to the Capital Programme and gain Member approval for changes in line with Financial Regulations and to reset the capital programme in line with latest information.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

A number of alternative courses of action are considered as part of the process undertaken by Officers before decisions are recommended to Members. The recommendations made to Members represent what Officers believe to be the best options available to the Council, in line with Council priorities, given the constraints on funding and the use to which funding is put within the Revenue Budget and the Capital Programme.

8.1

This report brings the Committee up to date with the Council’s final outturn position for 2022/23 including General Fund revenue position, Housing Revenue Account, and Capital Programme Monitoring (Appendix 1). The report also provides an update of the Council’s Treasury Management activity in 2022/23 and sets out expectations for the coming of the year (Appendix 2).

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Finance Committee:-

(a)  note the updated information and management actions provided by this report on the 2022/23 Revenue Budget Outturn as described in this report;

(b)  note the updated information and management actions provided by this report on the 2022/23 Capital Programme Monitoring as described in Appendix 1;

(c)   note the annual Treasury Management Outturn report for 2022/23 as described in Appendix 2; and

(d)  approve the revenue budget carry forward requests for 4 items:

              I.          £239k Local Area Committee & Ward Pots;

            II.          £259k Displaced general fund carried forward as a result of Team Around the Person funding from ICB spent in 2022/23;

          III.          £200k Youth – this proportion relates to the amount underspent on the Voluntary Sector grants in 2022/23; and

          IV.          £300k in the Housing General Fund for Registration Regulation that was initially allocated in 21/22 to fund staff to undertake enforcement work in Private Sector Housing.

8.3

Reasons for decisions

8.3.1

To record formally changes to the Revenue Budget and the Capital Programme.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.