Archived decisions
Environment and Transportation Select Committee
Suggestions for scrutiny topics for 2008/2009
Proposer |
Topic |
Cllr Porter |
Passenger Transport: the use of community minibuses specifically in the evenings Transport policy: should we be changing attitudes to local public transport ? Margaret Thatcher said `if you are 26 or over and travelling on public transport, you are a failure'. Should we be promoting the reverse or just accepting it is for people `who have nothing better to do' ? Access / road infrastructure: consideration of road maintenance methods and types of materials used on pavements and minor roads in view of increasingly elderly population and climate change drivers (eg. wetter, hotter) Waste management : helping smaller companies to recycle effectively and reduce landfill Hospital waste - where does it all go ? Can we include Hospital, Prison, HCC, local councils, PCTs etc and University and other public institutions into the Project Integra umbrella ? |
Cllr Reid |
Bus subsidies : how to use subsidies to create a better structure of service rather than extending the death-pangs of existing services (additional information at end of table) Infrastructure improvements : somewhere HCC should be starting to compile a `shopping list' of infrastructure improvements that will be neede if the Government's proposed levels of housing growth take place. In the Basingstoke area I have in mind: M3 Junction 6 grade separation Dualling of the A33 Improvements to the A339 Basingstoke - Newbury All these are too big to be funded from developers' contributions and should precede decision to develop. Every major location with growth will have a similar shopping list and should be compiling it now, both as a defensive mechanisms and as a necessary piece of homework. Recycling: we should be looking at ways of allowing more items to be placed in green bins (margarine tubs, yoghurt tubs, glass) |
Cllr Kemp-Gee |
Road network in East Hampshire: I would like to put forward the need for a thorough and detailed appraisal and study, in conjunction with the Highways Agency, concerning the serious situation that we face on the road network in East Hampshire and the implications of the Hindhead tunnel on the A3 and the effect this will have on the Ham Barn roundabout and the roads system stretching from the A3, A325, A31, A339, B3004, B3006 and many other rural roads in that area. No planning at all that I can find has gone into this, or the implications of building up to 100,000 new houses in Bordon and what effect that will have. Selbourne, on the B3006, is now experiencing nearly 10,000 vehicle movements a day - and this through one of the most historic and precious villages in Hampshire. Oakhanger and adjacent village with some single track roads is now subject to nearly 3,000 vehicle movements a day. All this is caused by the lack of a decent east/west route that will carry traffic to Basingstoke, Alton, Farnham, A31, A339, M3,M25 etc. I do not exaggerate when I say that this is of critical importance now. |
Cllr Dunsdon |
Environment and Transport spending: is there parity of expenditure by County Division ? Provision of public transport |
Cllr Carew |
Highways maintenance issues: not every pothole but the general backlog School travel plans Waste and Minerals Bus issues: following the Transport scrutiny report |
Cllr Neal |
The effect of inadequate investment in road infrastructure on the economic prospects of the Hampshire economy: the UK motorist, both for pleasure and business, are paying the highest road taxes in Europe yet seem to get the least back in investment in improving our road system and maintaining what we have What is the cost of congestion to business in Hampshire ? |
Topics proposed during 2007/08 and supported by the Select Committee |
Speed and traffic management Climate Change The state of Hampshire Roads - light touch scrutiny proposed for first quarter of 2008/09 |
Topic from January 2007 Select Committee meeting |
Trade waste control: outcome of changes introduced during 2007 |
Environment Department managers |
Highway condition of roads Performance results |
Cllr Reid.
Additional notes re bus subsidies.
How to use subsidies to create a better structure of service rather than extending the death-pangs of existing services.
Thesis: the factor that most affects whether people use public transport is its frequency. It helps if the buses are clean, the shelters are informative and the buses are on time, but these are secondary considerations and will not in make anyone give up their car.
The benefit of the car is that there is no delay in starting your journey. The benefit of a ten-minute bus service is that that the average wait is only five minutes. As soon as you get to half-hourly bus services or worse, you are asking people to order their lives according to someone else's timetable and they won't want to do that. Infrequent services die a slow death; eventually we pull the plug and incur huge criticism for withdrawing public money from a service that virtually no-one wants to use.
We therefore need to stop throwing good money after bad and start using our bus subsidy money pro-actively: getting key services near to the transport hubs operating with sufficient frequency to encourage people to use them. When those services become self-sustaining, the subsidy can be redirected to the next layer of services in the onion-skin.
Analogy: if you are in London, do you check the time of the next underground train? No, you just present yourself at the station, confident that the next train will be along in a few minutes. That's why it works.
I am therefore suggesting a stratgic review of how we use our subsidy money.
Just because that's always been the route, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.
In Basingstoke all bus routes lead to the bus station. Why? because we've always done it that way.
Many people want to go round the town: to the hospital or to an out-of town shopping centre. Why not a review of some more imaginative routing? This will apply to other towns too.