At its meeting on 7 March 2017 the Executive received a report of the Strategic Director, Place (Executive Document “BM”) on the 12 month trial ban on pavement obstructions in Bradford City Centre, Saltaire, Ilkley and on A647 Leeds Road between Thornbury Gyratory and Bradford City Centre.

On the basis of the trial’s findings a number of potential options for the continuation, revocation or amendment of the policy related to pavement obstructions in the future were presented for the Executive’s consideration and determination.

Executive resolved –

That the retention of the pavement obstruction ban be approved with the following modifications:

a)            The current trial zone ban areas be retained;

b)           Arrangements to allow licensing of pavement obstructions be incorporated into the Council’s approach.

c)            That the development of details of the licensing arrangements including the approval of policy for determining locations suitable for placement of obstructions and levels of license fee to be charged be delegated to the Strategic Director: Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.

The decision of the Executive was called in by Councillors Dale Smith and Joanne Sharp:

(i)         The reasons for Councillor Dale Smith requesting the call-in are:

The proposals give scant regard to the Equality Impact Assessment and subsequently do not sufficiently ameliorate the disadvantage those most affected particularly those with Visual Impairment or the need to use wheelchairs etc.

The evidence presented and upon which the decision was partially based, regarding the charge for a Licence is unrealistic, containing conflicting figures and presented alongside unconvincing evidence submitted by businesses regarding their claimed financial losses due to the removal of A-Boards, with the latter having been given too much emphasis.

A letter from the Ilkley Chamber of Trade was tabled but not circulated to members of the public and thus could not be challenged.

The loss of the Mobility and Inclusion Officer reduced the Council’s contact with service users, with the result that awareness of the decision to be taken at the Executive meeting was poorly advertised, thus reducing the opportunity of those whose mobility is to be most affected, to get quick access to the report in an appropriate format and have their voices heard.

The costing information provided for both the trial and the proposals are inadequate.  

The absence of adequate, detailed information detailing which other Local Authorities were implementing an A-Board ban or making a charge for any Licence, along with the outcomes, undermines the validity of the report upon which the decision was based, as this information would provide a much clearer picture of what to expect.

The absence of criteria for identifying areas where A-Boards can and cannot be placed undermines the validity of the decision taken, as this information would again provide the Executive and the vulnerable citizens who should benefit from any new policy.

The report did not adequately address the recommendations from the Health and Social Care O&S meeting.

(ii)        The reason for Councillor Sharp requesting the call-in are:

“I wish to call in the Executive decision of 7^th March 2017, Review of the Operation and Effectiveness of the 12 Month Trial Ban of Pavement obstructions (Document BM) to Health and Social care Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The reasons for the call in are:

1. The Executive document contains information not made available to the Health and Social Care O & S Committee when we carried out an extensive review of the trial ban in meetings last year so this new information needs to be considered by the Committee.

2. The Executive report itself does not reflect views of the O & S Committee for proper consideration by the Executive.  In part this is demonstrated by the scarcity of the views expressed by disability organisations (2 paragraphs only) in the Executive report.

3. The long term operational costs of either scheme are not clearly evidenced in the Executive report.

4.      The call in needs to happen to allow O & S Committee to consider the differences between the report we received and the report submitted to Exec to allow the committee to make an informed choice as to whether we maintain our decision of December last year or accept the decision made by the Executive.”

The reasons for the call-in were considered by the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 23 March 2017 together with the response to the call-in submitted by the Strategic Director, Place in Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee Document “AJ”. A copy of comments made by the Chair of the Ilkley Civic Society which had been circulated to Members of the Executive were also submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Committee,

Resolved –

That the decision of the Executive be referred to full Council for consideration.

In accordance with Paragraph 9 of Part 3E of the Constitution Members of Council can, following consideration of the matter, resolve to:

(1)  Release the decision for implementation.

(2)  Refer all or part of the decision back to the Executive to reconsider the decision and at the same time Council may make recommendations to the Executive that it may think fit.

The following motion is to be moved by Councillor Hinchcliffe and seconded by Councillor Ross-Shaw:

In February 2014 the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee requested that the Executive ‘bring about a change in the Authority’s available powers to deal more effectively with obstruction of the highway’.

Council notes that:

·         Bradford Council takes its responsibilities under the Highways Act seriously and under the existing Code of Practice for Advertising Displays any A-board reasonably deemed to constitute a danger to highway users will be removed

·         The trial ban of A-boards in Saltaire, Ilkley, Leeds Road and Bradford city centre were effective in reducing the number of A-boards on the highways

·         The growing number of Local Authorities introducing bans and other powers to manage the numbers and locations of A-boards on the public highway

Therefore Council proposes:

·         To ask the Council’s Executive to implement a full ban on A-boards across the district

·         That a report is sent to the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee to review the effectiveness of the ban 12 months after implementation

If Council makes no resolution, in accordance with the Constitution, the decision may be implemented.

                                                                        (Richard Gelder - 01274 436703)

At its meeting on 7 March 2017 the Executive received a report of the Strategic Director, Place (Executive Document “BM”) on the 12 month trial ban on pavement obstructions in Bradford City Centre, Saltaire, Ilkley and on A647 Leeds Road between Thornbury Gyratory and Bradford City Centre.

On the basis of the trial’s findings a number of potential options for the continuation, revocation or amendment of the policy related to pavement obstructions in the future were presented for the Executive’s consideration and determination.

Executive resolved –

That the retention of the pavement obstruction ban be approved with the following modifications:

i.         The current trial zone ban areas be retained;

ii.            Arrangements to allow licensing of pavement obstructions be incorporated into the Council’s approach.

iii.           That the development of details of the licensing arrangements including the approval of policy for determining locations suitable for placement of obstructions and levels of license fee to be charged be delegated to the Strategic Director: Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.

The decision of the Executive was called in by Councillors Dale Smith and Joanne Sharp:

(i)         The reasons for Councillor Dale Smith requesting the call-in were:

“The proposals give scant regard to the Equality Impact Assessment and subsequently do not sufficiently ameliorate the disadvantage those most affected particularly those with Visual Impairment or the need to use wheelchairs etc.

The evidence presented and upon which the decision was partially based, regarding the charge for a Licence is unrealistic, containing conflicting figures and presented alongside unconvincing evidence submitted by businesses regarding their claimed financial losses due to the removal of A-Boards, with the latter having been given too much emphasis.

A letter from the Ilkley Chamber of Trade was tabled but not circulated to members of the public and thus could not be challenged.

The loss of the Mobility and Inclusion Officer reduced the Council’s contact with service users, with the result that awareness of the decision to be taken at the Executive meeting was poorly advertised, thus reducing the opportunity of those whose mobility is to be most affected, to get quick access to the report in an appropriate format and have their voices heard.

The costing information provided for both the trial and the proposals are inadequate.  

The absence of adequate, detailed information detailing which other Local Authorities were implementing an A-Board ban or making a charge for any Licence, along with the outcomes, undermines the validity of the report upon which the decision was based, as this information would provide a much clearer picture of what to expect.

The absence of criteria for identifying areas where A-Boards can and cannot be placed undermines the validity of the decision taken, as this information would again provide the Executive and the vulnerable citizens who should benefit from any new policy.

The report did not adequately address the recommendations from the Health and Social Care O&S meeting.”

(ii)        The reasons for Councillor Sharp requesting the call-in were:

“I wish to call in the Executive decision of 7^th March 2017, Review of the Operation and Effectiveness of the 12 Month Trial Ban of Pavement obstructions (Document BM) to Health and Social care Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The reasons for the call in are:

1. The Executive document contains information not made available to the Health and Social Care O & S Committee when we carried out an extensive review of the trial ban in meetings last year so this new information needs to be considered by the Committee.

2. The Executive report itself does not reflect views of the O & S Committee for proper consideration by the Executive.  In part this is demonstrated by the scarcity of the views expressed by disability organisations (2 paragraphs only) in the Executive report.

3. The long term operational costs of either scheme are not clearly evidenced in the Executive report.

4.      The call in needs to happen to allow O & S Committee to consider the differences between the report we received and the report submitted to Exec to allow the committee to make an informed choice as to whether we maintain our decision of December last year or accept the decision made by the Executive.”

The reasons for the call-in were considered by the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 23 March 2017 together with the response to the call-in submitted by the Strategic Director, Place in Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee Document “AJ”. A copy of comments made by the Chair of the Ilkley Civic Society which had been circulated to Members of the Executive were also submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Committee resolved that the decision of the Executive be referred to full Council for consideration.

In accordance with Paragraph 9 of Part 3E of the Constitution Members of Council could, following consideration of the matter, resolve to:

(1)   Release the decision for implementation.

      (2)  Refer all or part of the decision back to the Executive to reconsider the decision and at the same time Council may make recommendations to the Executive that it may think fit.

A motion, as set out below, moved by Councillor Hinchcliffe was carried.

Amendments moved by Councillor Hawkesworth and Councillor Warnes were defeated.

Resolved –

In February 2014 the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee requested that the Executive ‘bring about a change in the Authority’s available powers to deal more effectively with obstruction of the highway’.

Council notes that:

·         Bradford Council takes its responsibilities under the Highways Act seriously and under the existing Code of Practice for Advertising Displays any A-board reasonably deemed to constitute a danger to highway users will be removed

·         The trial ban of A-boards in Saltaire, Ilkley, Leeds Road and Bradford city centre were effective in reducing the number of A-boards on the highways

·         The growing number of Local Authorities introducing bans and other powers to manage the numbers and locations of A-boards on the public highway

Therefore Council proposes:

·         To ask the Council’s Executive to implement a full ban on A-boards across the district

·           That a report is sent to the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee to review the effectiveness of the ban 12 months after implementation.

ACTION:       Strategic Director Place/City Solicitor (referral to Executive)