Minutes:
The
Board received a report a report of the Strategic Director, Environment which
informed Members of a petition that had been received from residents of
It was noted that the petition was received on 21st
September 2009 by 106 residents requesting that the Council look again at
improving the bus service along
The Board was provided with details of the timetable for the
currently operating 52 bus service. Unfortunately, it was noted that there no
direct commercial alternative bus services operating via
The Board was advised
that the 52 service was subsidised by the Council and was operated under a
local bus contract agreement by Anthony’s Travel. The cost of the contract
currently stood at £20,840 per annum and was subsidised due to there being no
alternative commercial service operating via
It was estimated that the cost of extending the 52 service on a Monday to Saturday daytime would be in the region of £14,000 per year which would have to be funded from the Council’s Bus Support allocation.
It was recognised that the existing service did not adequataely meet the needs of the residents in providing access to Runcorn Town Centre. However, there was considerable pressure on the Council’s Bus Support allocation therefore the extended service would operate for a period of 6 months to enable an assessment to be made of the benefits.
It was further proposed at the end of this 6 month trial period that the Operational Director (Highways, Transportation and Logistics), in consultation with the Executive Board Member for Planning, Transportation, Regeneration and Renewal, evaluate the assessment of costs and benefits and made a decision on whether to continue with the extension of the service, based on passenger numbers and availability of funding.
Councillor Stockton addressed the Board on behalf of local residents in support of the extension to the 52 service.
Arising from Members comments and questions it was noted that
· bus services in the Borough were reviewed as part of an annual process undertaken by Officers and where gaps were identified the Council’s Bus Support Allocation was utilised to provide services as much as possible;
· the Council operated a Public Transport Advisory Panel (PTAP) which had representation from local residents, members of the Board and local bus service providers;
· although the PTAP met regularly and influenced bus service providers, there was no direct responsibility on providers to support loss making services.
RESOLVED: That
(1) support be given to extending the 52 bus service so that the
last journey departing from
(2) following an assessment of the benefits of the extended service, the Operational Director (Highways, Transportation and Logistics) in consultation with the Executive Board Member Planning, Transportation, Regeneration and Renewal makes a decision on whether to continue to operate the extension to the service; and
(3) Organisers of the petition be advised of this decision.
Supporting documents: