Agenda and minutes

To issue a welcome to those present, and to confirm if there are any apologies for absence.

The Chair welcomed those present to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Rae Bhatia

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Clarke, Cllr Bajaj substituted.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed on the agenda.

Members were asked to declare any interests they may have had in the business to be discussed.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission held on 23^rd April 2025 have been circulated, and Members will be asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Those who were present at the previous meeting agreed the minutes to be correct.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission held on 23 April 2024 be confirmed as a correct record.

The Membership of the Commission will be confirmed and noted.

The Membership of the Commission was confirmed as follows:

Councillor Waddington (Chair)

Councillor Cassidy (Vice-Chair)

Councillor Bonham

Councillor Clarke

Councillor O’Neill

Councillor Rae Bhatia

Councillor Osman

Councillor Porter

Members will be asked to note the meeting dates of the commission for 2025/26:

25 June 2025

27 August 2025

5 November 2025

14 January 2026

11 March 2026

22 April 2026

The dates of the meetings for the Commission were confirmed as follows:

25 June 2025

27 August 2025

5 November 2025

14 January 2026

11 March 2026

22 April 2026

The Commission will be asked to note the Terms of Reference.

The Commission noted the Scrutiny Terms of Reference.

The Chair is invited to make any announcements as they see fit. 

There were no announcements.

Dr Patel asks:

Having a look at the new parking signs around the city I have noticed that the 'Monday-Sat' or 'Monday -Fri' are missing. I am assuming this now means that street parking fees now apply 7 days a week. This was not included in the executive decision report in March 2025. Can the responsible person/City Mayor please address the following questions;

1. Why was this change not clearly stated or highlighted in the relevant Executive Decision report?
2. Do parking charges still apply on bank holidays?
3. Can the signs be changed back so there are no parking charges on Sunday?

Dr Spowage asks:

Why are there no automatic bollards on the Granby Street Pedestrian and Cycle Zone that is between Northampton Street and St Georges Way? 

The bollards are on the plans that were presented to this committee on 13th October 2021 (available in the public reports pack, p.107) and are a part of the tender, and therefore money will have been allocated for them.

The Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership delivery plan for 2022/2023, published on 7th December 2022, notes that the Granby Street scheme is now complete (p.8). 

The Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership Annual Update, published on 7th December 2022, talks of the Granby Street regeneration project as if it were complete (p.4).

However, the automatic bollards have not been installed and I cannot find any public reference to their omission. I have highlighted this issue multiple times on the Love Leicester portal but there has been no tangible improvement. In fact, the situation has been getting worse. This Pedestrian and Cycle Zone is used as a cruising strip by motorists. I have observed and documented up to seventeen vehicles at a time illegally parked and illegally driving along this section of Granby Street. This happens every day, at all times of the day and night. The Civil Enforcement Officers are overwhelmed. There are often so many motor vehicles that the whole street becomes blocked; usually by large SUVs, taxis and luxury track cars. As a cyclist, I have suffered three near misses with motorists on this section of Granby Street, and have witnessed a number of close calls between other cyclists and motorists, and between pedestrians and motorists. It is an incredibly unsafe and unpleasant place for pedestrians and cyclists.

The following question was presented to the commission by Dr Spowage:

Why are there no automatic bollards on the Granby Street Pedestrian and Cycle Zone that is between Northampton Street and St Georges Way? 

The bollards are on the plans that were presented to this committee on 13th October 2021 (available in the public reports pack, p.107) and are a part of the tender, and therefore I expect that money will have been allocated for them.

The Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership delivery plan for 2022/2023, published on 7th December 2022, notes that the Granby Street scheme is now complete (p.8). 

The Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership Annual Update, published on 7th December 2022, talks of the Granby Street regeneration project as if it were complete (p.4).

However, the automatic bollards have not been installed and I cannot find any public reference to their omission. I have highlighted this issue multiple times on the Love Leicester portal but there has been no tangible improvement. In fact, the situation has been getting worse. This Pedestrian and Cycle Zone is used as a cruising strip by motorists. I have observed and documented up to seventeen vehicles at a time illegally parked and illegally driving along this section of Granby Street. This happens every day, at all times of the day and night. The Civil Enforcement Officers are overwhelmed. There are often so many motor vehicles that the whole street becomes blocked; usually by large SUVs, taxis and luxury track cars. As a cyclist, I have suffered three near misses with motorists on this section of Granby Street, and have witnessed a number of close calls between other cyclists and motorists, and between pedestrians and motorists. It feels like, and I believe this is an incredibly unsafe and unpleasant place for pedestrians and cyclists.

The Chair thanked Dr Spowage for the question and invited an officer to respond.

The Director of Planning – Development Transportation responded noting the following:

• The issues highlighted were known issues.
• The bollard installation was in the pipeline, and this was to be reflected during the current meeting.
• Subject to the programme approval, the bollards should be installed at the Granby Street section and would be similar in nature to the ones already placed with the central area of the city.

In response to a supplementary question form Dr Spowage on whether it would still be the case that plans included bollards at both ends of the section, the Director of Planning, Development and Transportation responded that:

• He would consider Dr Spowage’s thoughts and would come back to him.
• The bollard position had not yet been finalised and Dr Spowage’s input was welcomed.

In response to a further supplementary question from Dr Spowage regarding timescale and whether there was any reasoning behind the delay on bollards in this section compared to the rest of the city, the Director of Planning, Development and Transportation responded:

• The Council had been working closely with the police to prioritise appropriately.
• For the second  ...  view the full minutes text for item 158.

Any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures will be reported.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

Directors will give a presentation providing an overview of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission.

The Director Planning of Development and Transportation and Director for Tourism, Culture and Economy gave a presentation using the slides attached to the agenda. This provided an overview of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission, giving a reminder of the services sitting within the commission. Additional points to note included:

• An unsuccessful procurement exercise had taken place for the train station, and a second procurement exercise is being progressed following review. It was anticipated that this would be taken back to market in the next few months. 
• Figures on the annual maintenance costs for the city bus stations would be circulated to the commission.
• An offer to tour the Waterside development had not been taken up yet by the commission, the invite remained open.
• There had been several successful bids to secure funding from central government over previous years. Projects such as Canopy, Dock and the LCB Depot had all been created largely out of these funds.
• Newly available property and land was usually taken up by businesses very quickly
• Current government funding was typically directed towards housing or transport, so opportunities had now reduced. The Industrial Strategy had been published recently so prospects were being explored. There could be potential to work with the private sector.
• Each asset disposal had a level of certainty with external advice taken from qualified valuers. A report would come to scrutiny on the disposal of general assets.

The Director of Tourism; Culture & Economy provided an overview of his division, noting the following:

• The construction of the new business workspace Canopy (the redeveloped Pilot House) was complete, and was now at the fit out stage. The building was anticipated to open in early September, and would include a new café. The workspace was already 38% pre-let.  The name ‘Canopy’ had been developed with branding consultants to reflect the architecture of the building and the creation of a protective and welcoming space for businesses.

Market rents had been set at a good level and it was estimated that when Canopy was fully occupied in several years this would contribute to the revenue surplus generated by the workspace portfolio and was already factored in to financial planning for the Council.

• Sector training facilities, such as the Construction Hub at Bishopdale in Beaumont Leys supported individuals from disadvantaged communities.
• A high-profile Apprentice Graduation ceremony was due to take place shortly with an anticipated attendance of around 150-200 apprentice graduates.
• The commission would remain updated on timescales for the market place development. A planning application for works on the public realm, in front of the Corn Exchange, had been submitted. Work on the design of the development on the market structure in front of the exchange was ongoing.
• A high profile event showcasing Leicester’s fashion and textiles sector, organised by Fashion Enter, had been delivered at Athena on 14^th May 2025 with 65 local manufacturers exhibiting. This had drawn an attendance of over 1000 people with industry speakers and specialists engaging with that event  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160.

The City Transport Director submits a report to provide members of the commission with details of the government grants made available for transport improvements in the 25/26 financial year and to advise members of the commission of the projects and programmes these grants will allow us to deliver or support.

The City Transport Director presented the reports attached to the agenda. These were to be taken in tandem to provide members of the commission with details of the government grants made available for transport improvements in the 25/26 financial year, and to advise members of the commission of the projects and programmes these grants will allow us to deliver or support. Key points to note were as follows:

• The vast majority of funding available to the service came via Government grants. Bids had not always come to fruition, but Leicester did tend to have more success than other local authorities. The government had announced that they were intending to move away from this method, towards an allocation approach.
• £21.9m of additional grants have been made available to the authority for this financial year. This was across the Active Travel fund, the Local Transport Grant, the Bus Service Improvement plan, the Consolidated Active Travel Fund, the Local Transport Resource Grant and the Bus Service Operators Grant.
• The Local Transport Grant was only initially available, for this financial year, to local authorities in the North and the Midlands. The primary restrictions were are that the grant cannot be spent on heavy rail, or on the strategic road network.
• The Consolidated Active Travel Fund would allow continuation of work including promoting safe access to school.
• All grants mentioned must be spent by the end of the financial year, apart from the Consolidated Active Travel Fund which must be spent by March 2027, but projects must be on site by March 2026.
• The Consolidated Active Travel Fund would allow for preparation and delivery of Rally Park phase 2 which included extending the project across the bridge at Fosse Road North, enabling connections into the new school sites.

The Chair thanked The City Transport Director for the presentation and welcome questions and comments from the commission. Key points to note were as follows:

• Regarding spending, the announcement of funding had come relatively late, time was of the essence and works were being prioritised to achieve best success. Conversations on timeframe flexibility could take place with central government.
• In response to a question, it was noted that the report of Rally Park running costs had also included aspects such as lighting and vegetation and were not only reflecting the costing of the new path and cycleways.
• Confidence had grown in the ability to retain staff.
• Suitable projects that were quicker to complete were at the forefront of planning.
• Illuminated street signage required considerable consultation and designing, and also entailed maintenance and running costs. Street sign legislation dictated the lighting put in place.
• Proposals on the work to take place on Aylestone Road would be circulated to members. 
• The 20 mph scheme was limited by resource but the potential would be explored for this to be expedited.
• The Local Transport funding would remain in place up until 2030, absolute confirmation was awaited from the Department of Transport. Further details were expected to come in the Autumn for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

The City Transport Director Submits a report to provide details of the Department for Transport 25/26 Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) and Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) to members of the commission and to outline the intended approach for the deployment of funds related to BSIP and BSOG.

The City Transport Director Submits a report to provide details of the Department for Transport 25/26 Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) and Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) to members of the commission and to outline the intended approach for the deployment of funds related to BSIP and BSOG.

Key points included:

• The grant process had been competitive.
• The Council was part of the Leicester Buses Enhanced Partnership.
• The funding for the Improvement Plan must be spent on projects within the published Bus Service Improvement Plan, that were previously agreed and approved by the Department for transport (DfT), and projects that promoted bus use for residents and visitors to the city.
• Procuring buses or routes at short notice resulted in very high costs, especially when only operating for a short period of time. This hampers direct investment, and restricted how the authority can invest the funding.
• Another difficulty had been that capital schemes such as bus priority required extensive design, modelling, engagement and consultation.
• Priorities for the programme therefore included:
  • Areas where there is opportunity to obtain private sector investment.
  • Projects that were deemed deliverable against the March 2026 deadline.
  • Opportunities which could benefit revenue-saving and passenger growth.
  • Areas where future withdrawal of funding would not be disruptive or damaging.
  • Areas which will improve the network and the accessibility of the network, and where research showed that investment could lead to long-term sustained passenger growth.
• It was proposed that the programme:
  • Operated a grant scheme for purchasing electric busses, similar to the DfT Zero Emission Bus Regional Areas scheme.
  • Continued the same level of support for the Hop! service and the Park and Ride service.
  • Maintained real-time information.
  • Supported Greenline routes.
  • Provided branding, marketing and promotional work across the Leicester flexi area.
  • Provided additional printed timetable information at certain bus stops.
  • Supported the development of future programmes.
  • Supported staff resource required for delivery of services.
• The programme allowed for the potential of up to £23m in investment, including match funding from bus operators.
• Future funding was dependent on hitting deadlines, so it was important to get the scheme up and running.

The Commission were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• In response to questions about whether subsidies lead to passenger growth, it was stated that the market was there in terms of discounting fares and running on certain routes, however, services needed to cater for the market and the need of travel in terms of journey times.  Research maximised the opportunity to continue services and services would receive newer electric buses, which had faster acceleration and were more comfortable, which has led to people changing their travel habits.
• This was only a 1-year programme, so investment would only be made in what would yield long-term benefits.
• In response to a query about whether services in Thurncourt ward could be established as part of the scheme, it was explained that new drivers would need to be recruited and new buses purchased, this would mean a heavy cost premium.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 162.

The City Transport Director will discuss with the Commission as to how they wish to approach informal scrutiny sessions on the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan.

The City Transport Director discussed with the Commission as to how they wished to approach informal scrutiny sessions on the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan.

Whilst there would be engagement at Ward level, the Commission could consider the plan more holistically.

It was suggested that it would be preferable to commence scrutiny in July due to funding limitations.

It was suggested that ‘walking buses’ could be considered as part of the scrutiny.

AGREED:

That an online session be convened for members of the Commission to consider the plan.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider the work programme and make suggestions for additional items as it considers necessary.

Members of the Commission were invited to consider content of the work programme and were invited to make suggestions for additions as appropriate to be brought to future meetings.

The work programme was noted. 

There being no further items of urgent business, the meeting finished at 19:20.