Environment Audit CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Kerry Bentley, Community Organiser for High Green and Chapeltown
Comments from me as Community Organiser based in the community of High Green in Sheffield S35 postcode with the knowledge of the community I work in being used to consider a response. Comments are very basic and not what is in line with what should be expected for this type of consultation but there has been no opportunity to undertake proper research.
High Green is a community of around 10,000 residents in the north of the city.
The community has no library, four primary schools, no secondary school, and a school for conductive education and has part of its community in the top 10% most deprived wards in the country and a disproportionately elderly population.
The community has not been given any amount of time to respond to this consultation as it only found out about it very recently.
1. How are the Government’s current transport policies affecting the accessibility of public services? Can people get to key services at reasonable cost, in reasonable time and with reasonable ease?
This consultation came to our attention too late to be able to find and study the full policy. Local people are able to access a GP and dentist surgery in the community but due to the topography of the area some elderly people have to rely on buses to get them around the village. Buses are notoriously unreliable in the area and the community has just had to petition against a plan in the Sheffield Bus Partnership consultation proposals to scrap one of its bus services that were vital for sections of the community to access health and education facilities in Rotherham. Out of hours GP surgeries in High Green send patients to Rotherham hospitals. The local secondary school in Ecclesfield is a partner school of two colleges in Rotherham and there are around 150 students travelling from the S35 postcode to the colleges relying on buses to get there.
As I say we haven’t had time to see and analyse the transport policies but we know that local people do find accessing services (as they are predominantly outside the village) costly and difficult. Access to the city centre for example on public transport takes around an hour and new bus proposals mean a new route being introduced which will now extend these journey times by an additional 15 minutes. (not accounting for peak times, road works etc).
2. Are other policies (such as planning, education, health, welfare and work etc) affecting the accessibility of public services and the environment?
Again without having chance to read the policies a full appraisal can’t be made.
Planning policy locally is affecting the health of local people. RecyCoal has recently submitted a planning application to extract 395,000 tonnes of coal from a 40 year old ex coking plant spoil heap in the Hesley Wood area of the Chapeltown area which neighbours High Green. The site was purchased by RecyCoal in January 2012 from the Homes and Communities Agency. Their policy allows “economic assets” that it holds to be sold on for the money to be used elsewhere by Government to help the economy. The sites should be then used for community benefit. Schemes of this nature will offer four to five years of drastic health issues for local people. Planning policy is so in favour of the developer local people are at a real disadvantage to fight against it. The HCA policy contradicts the governments Big Society agency.
3. Do decisions on the location of public services adequately reflect the public transport that is in place to allow people to access them?
No. The bus petition I mention earlier was partly arguing the change to a bus service from High Green to Sheffield City Centre. We were told by the authorities involved that the bus route was being changed to coincide with a new health centre that was being built in a different part of the city. Residents that would be negatively affected in our community by the bus change will not be in the catchment area for the new surgery so will be unable to use it so the bus change will be of no use to them for this purpose. The health centre should have been built where existing links were already available.
4. Are environmental impacts considered when planning where to build/position public services? eg if a hospital is built far away from public transport links, do you think planners consider the environmental impact of people using cars/taxis to access it? How significant do you think this is to deciding where public services should be?
No they don’t. Planning policy allows for a travel plan to be submitted but this is never enforced/monitored or fined against if the applicant doesn’t implement it. Often stating that staff/customers etc will travel via public transport or is just a paper tick box exercise. I think it is very significant, local people should be correctly liaised with PRIOR to any changes being made, it is them that have to live with any consequences and they should be LISTENED to correctly about how they will be impacted but also so they properly shape services. Too many authorities choose to “do things” to communities rather than spend the time finding out what they actually need and want first.
5. The Government has asked that the accessibility of public services is considered when planning local transport links, do you think this is working? Do you think that the Department for Transport has taken forward the accessibility agenda?
When transport is provided by private companies, profit will be prioritised over public need/benefit. Transport infrastructure is often already not 100% right.
6. How should you measure how accessible a public service is by public transport?
Length of time taken to travel, frequency of services, affordability.
7. When planning transport infrastructure, do you think the social and accessibility needs conflicts with environmental considerations?
Unsure without being given enough time to consider the policies behind this, but social and accessibility needs often get left until the last consideration.
8. Would a measure of the transport accessibility of key public services, in a similar manner as “fuel poverty”, be useful for policy-making? If so, how do you think it should be measured?
Possibly, but again without the correct amount of time to consider a response I can’t say.
9. Do you think that having broadband networks and the internet is lessening the need for transport infrastructure to access public services?
No not at all. Our community is limited in its access to the internet anyway. In terms of library services perhaps but other services no I don’t think so.
7 September 2012