Jeremy Hilton renews call for new comprehensive school in the north of Gloucester

Closed by the Tories. Jeremy Hilton outside former Bishop’s College. A lost opportunity to build new comprehensive school here.

Jeremy Hilton has reiterated calls for a new secondary school to be built in the north of the city.

It comes after forecasts prepared by the Department for Education reveal a shortfall of 477 secondary school places in Gloucester by 2023/24.

Across the country 130,000 children are at risk of missing out on a secondary school place over the next five years, according to the Local Government Association.

Rising birth rates and the thousands of new homes built at Kingsway and Cooper’s Edge has seen increasing pressure for primary school places in Gloucester.

But with thousands of new homes planned on the outskirts of Gloucester – at Innsworth, Churchdown and Brockworth as part of the Joint Core Strategy – there will be further demand on school places.

Gloucester Liberal Democrats have long argued there was a need for a new non-selective secondary school in the north of the city as children not attending either Sir Thomas Rich’s or Denmark Road High School for Girls, having to travel to Churchdown, Brockworth, Tewkesbury, Newent, the south of Gloucester or further afield.

Jeremy Hilton said the school should have been built on the former Bishop’s College site in Longlevens but housing is now being built there instead.

When Jeremy and Gloucester Lib Dems first called for a new comprehensive secondary school in the north of Gloucester the then Conservative county council cabinet member for children and young people dismissed it as a “pre-election stunt”.

But the need for a new secondary school in Gloucester has now been supported by a report prepared by the county council.

The Gloucester City School Places Review said the need for extra primary school places would be met by expanding existing schools and agreements with housing developers to build additional schools.

But with secondary schools the review states that there is a “significant shortfall of places from 2022” and a new site for a secondary school in Gloucester should be found.

The report also says that existing secondary schools should be expanded where possible.

Councillor Jeremy Hilton, said:

“When we first questioned which secondary schools the children living in all the new family homes being built on the outskirts of Gloucester would go to, the Tories just dismissed our concern.

“With so many houses planned because of the Joint Core Strategy it was obvious there was going to be further pressure on primary and secondary school places in Gloucester.

“The Department for Education’s own forecasts support this, and the county council has now realised what we have been saying all along about the need for a new comprehensive secondary school.

”It is vital that this school is non-selective. A genuine, high performing comprehensive school. There is no need for any further grammar school places. The grammars are already taking far too many pupils that live outside the city and even outside Gloucestershire. The new comprehensive school must be built to serve those that live in the north of Gloucester.”

Ends…

Pride in the European Union

Jeremy Hilton & Rebecca Trimnell with Lib Dem team campaigning in Gloucester

Liberal Democrats in Gloucester will be taking their campaign to remain in the European Union to Gloucester Pride on Saturday when party members will be handing out cards encouraging everyone to support having a People’s Vote on the final Brexit deal.

This campaign will proceed a major debate at the county council when councillors will be encouraged to support a Lib Dem motion calling for a People’s Vote on the Brexit deal. In proposing a new referendum Liberal Democrats will want there to be a option to remain in the European Union.

Gloucester City Liberal Democrat Leader Cllr. Jeremy Hilton (Lib Dem – Kingsholm & Wotton) who is a county councillor will speak in the debate said: 

“Gloucester may have voted leave in 2016, but I imagine many people are now having second thoughts. The government’s handling of the Brexit negotiations is lamentable. Leave lied to the public. Boris Johnson has quit just as David Davies did before him.

“I will be urging all county councillors to back the Lib Dem call for a people’s vote on the final Brexit deal. It is imperative that the people of Gloucester and the United Kingdom have the final say on whether to proceed with Brexit or to remain members of the European Union.

“Leaving the EU will mean the loss of citizenship rights we now all enjoy. Currently we are able to work, study, live and retire anywhere in the EU. Our European Health Insurance Card provides health cover across all member states. These are benefits that are important to everyone, but especially so for the younger generation who are starting out on their adult lives.”

“We must also consider the negative impact that leaving the EU will have on many local businesses that trade within the Single Market.”

Dr. Rebecca Trimnell, Gloucester’s parliamentary spokesperson, said:

”I voted Remain in 2016 and I still believe that the UK should retain its full membership of the European Union. The evidence from the chaotic negotiations suggests that the best option is the status quo. It is also best option for Gloucester.

“I have spoken to many people who are worried about their own future, not only UK citizens but those EU nationals who live and work in the city. We cannot leave it to this incompetent government to make the decision on the final Brexit deal. The public must decide in a People’s Vote.”

Jeremy Hilton’s letter to Planning Inspectorate – Redrow appeal

Redrow Homes has appealed to the Secretary of State about Gloucester City Council’s non-determination of their planning application to build 89 dwellings on the former Civil Service Sports Ground off Estcourt Road. Application reference 16/00968/FUL.

This controversial application raised many objections from local residents when it was originally deposited with the council in 2016.

The deadline for comments to the Planning Inspectorate from the public was the 9th of August this year. Jeremy Hilton’s letter is below.

Gloucester City Council has still to respond. Within a few weeks the council will take its response to the planning committee for approval, before it is sent to the Planning Inspectorate.

 

 

Jeremy Hilton fighting to save the Civil Service Sports Ground

Jeremy Hilton’s Letter to Planning Inspectorate

I write to ask you to dismiss the appeal by Redrow Homes related to the planning application for 89 houses on the former Civil Service Sports Club ground (Ref:16/00968/FUL).

I am the local county and city councillor for Kingsholm & Wotton.

On the 19th of April 2017, I did write to the case officer at Gloucester City Council pointing out that the application was then seven months old and that it should be determined with a recommendation to refuse.

The council said they were giving more time to Redrow to resolve the issue about the loss of sports pitches. Redrow had not in April 2017 nor since provided evidence on how they would mitigate for the loss of the playing fields.

There is a shortage of rugby and football pitches in Gloucester. Spartans Ruby Club, which is based in Kingsholm, is looking for an additional pitch near to its club house, which is in neighbouring Sherborne Street.

The High School for Girls, which is in Denmark Road has also spoken to me about possible use of the sports field if it is saved from development.

All Redrow have done since acquiring the site in 2011 (for just £10,000) is shut the gates and demolish the club house etc, making the facilities unavailable for active sport that it had previously been used for.

Similarly, since acquiring the site Redrow have failed to properly discuss the future of the playing fields with the local community that is required in the Joint Core Strategy policy INF4. The lack of community engagement is lamentable.

Redrow’s idea of consultation has been to lodge two full planning applications with the council, leaving no opportunity for the council or the community to hold discussions about how the site could be developed for some housing, but leaving the rest of the site available for sport and recreation.

As Keith Annis a senior manager at Redrow once told me they were playing for time. The question must be asked why has it taken them nearly two years from depositing the planning application to lodge an appeal?

For Redrow to appeal against non-determination is rather hypocritical, particularly to do this only a few weeks after lodging a new planning application for 100 dwellings on the same site (Ref 18/00306/FUL)

Further Comments

A.    Affordable housing:

The plan for affordable homes did not meet the council’s then standard, when the application was submitted, which was 40 %. The application lists 18 dwellings as intermediate housing, this is equates to 20% of the build.

It was impossible for the council to approve an application that did not meet this standard. Subsequently, the Joint Core Strategy has been adopted, where the new limit is set at 20%.

B. Land Purchase:

The applicants purchased the sports ground from the Civil Service Sports Council Ltd for just £10,000 in 2011 (GR355501). The applicants should publicly declare the details of the uplift clause they have with Civil Service Sports Council Ltd.

I believe it is this legal agreement that is responsible for the maximisation of housing on the site rather than what one would expect an open discussion with the council and community on a development brief that would benefit all.

Some degree of housing whilst retaining the main sports field for sport and recreation, would benefit everyone.

C.    Alternative sport provision:

It may be that the land has not been used for sport for more than five years, but that is because of a deliberate policy by the landowners to close the ground for sporting activities.

I concur with Sport England that the application should be refused.

The applicants have failed to identify alternative facilities that could accommodate sporting activities that previously took place on the Civil Service Sports ground.

In my opinion, alternative provision must be within the Kingsholm & Wotton ward.

D. Joint Core Strategy INF3

The proposed development of 89 dwellings in my opinion is not consistent with JCS policy on green infrastructure. The former Civil Service Sport Ground provides a worthy green infrastructure asset that should be protected to help resolve the shortage of open space in Kingsholm and Wotton.

I believe it is not beyond the wit of all parties to come up with a development solution that would provide much needed housing whilst retaining a large open space that could continue to be used for sport and recreation.

Here is Policy INF3

1. The green infrastructure network of local and strategic importance will be conserved and enhanced, in order to deliver a series of multifunctional, linked green corridors across the JCS area by:
i. Improving the quantity and/or quality of assets;
ii. Improving linkages between assets in a manner appropriate to the scale of development, and
iii. Designing improvements in a way that supports the cohesive management of green
infrastructure;
2. Development proposals should consider and contribute positively towards green infrastructure, including the wider landscape context and strategic corridors between major assets and populations. Where new residential development will create, or add to, a need for publicly accessible green space or outdoor space for sports and recreational on, this will be fully met in accordance with Policy INF4. Development at Strategic Alloca ons will be required to deliver connectivity through the site, linking urban areas with the wider rural hinterland
3. Existing green infrastructure will be protected in a manner that reflects its contribution
to ecosystem services (including biodiversity, landscape / townscape quality, the historic environment, public access, recreation and play) and the connectivity of the green infrastructure network. Development proposals that will have an impact on woodlands, hedges and trees will need to include a jus ca on for why this impact cannot be avoided and should incorporate measures acceptable to the Local Planning Authority to mi gate the loss. Mi ga on should be provided on-site or, where this is not possible, in the immediate environs of the site
4. Where assets are created, retained or replaced within a scheme, they should be properly integrated into the design and contribute to local character and distinctiveness. Proposals should also make provisions for future maintenance of green infrastructure.

E. Joint Core Strategy INF4

As I have previously mentioned the lack of serious community engagement by Redrow ahead of this planning application, about the future use of the site, is lamentable.

Redrow have only showed plans that have proposed the complete building on the site, with the loss of the playing fields. They have never properly consulted anyone.

I believe they failed to meet the requirement of Joint Core Strategy policy INF4 for social and community infrastructure

Here is Policy INF4

1. Proposals to develop land or buildings currently or previously in use as a community facility will demonstrate, including evidence of engagement with relevant local community groups and partner organisations, why the facility is no longer required and, as appropriate, how, when and where suitable local replacement facilities will be provided. Provision of replacement facilities will have regard to the locational and other relevant elements of this policy
2. Where new residential development will create, or add to, a need for community facilities, it will be fully met as on-site provision and/or as a contribution to facilities or services o -site. New or refurbished provision will be of an appropriate type, standard and size. From an early stage, developers will be expected to engage with the relevant local authorities and infrastructure providers and, as appropriate, relevant local community groups where they exist, to ensure that new provision meets the needs of the community that it will serve and is t for purpose
3. Social and community infrastructure should be centrally located to the population it serves and
be easily accessible on foot and by bicycle. It should be located so as to have the potential to be well-served by public transport. Developers should aim to provide flexible, multifunctional facilities within mixed-use developments, creating shared space which maximises benefits to the community and minimises land-take. In the case of open space, ‘easily accessible’ means it is located within reasonable walking distance of the development it serves. New facilities should be accessible to all members of the community, and be planned and phased in parallel with new development.

F. Draft City Plan Policy SA06

The provision of 89 dwellings is in my opinion is overdevelopment of the site, which is in the heart of Kingsholm.

Council policy as identified in the draft City Plan, which was approved by council in December 2016, recommends a maximum of twenty dwellings (SA06).

The proposal of 89 dwellings exceeds this policy by 445%, with the complete loss of the playing fields.

A compromise of 40 dwellings, for example, on this site would mean that the former sports field could be brought back into use.

G. Layout of the site:

The layout of the site does not follow the usual street pattern that is evident in Kingsholm. It is adjacent to both the Kingsholm and Denmark Road conservation areas.

I am concerned that the narrow streets on estate may be become clogged up with motorists parking their cars on footpaths. This is a problem that will be exacerbated during times when there are rugby matches being played at the Kingsholm stadium.

The small public open space is set out to give the impression that it is an exclusive space just for the new residents of the estate. New public open space should laid out to be inclusive and available to all Kingsholm residents.

H.    Highway access:

I am not convinced by the design of the access point onto Estcourt Road slip road.

The proposed access onto Denmark Road is unacceptable. It closes the slip road to Lansdown Road and removes much-needed parking spaces on Denmark Road.

The closure of the slip road will create more vehicle conflict at the other junction with Lansdown Road. This will be a particular problem when school coaches use this junction.

The closure of the slip road will also remove the u-turn provision it provides for the houses serviced off the dual carriageway section of Denmark Road on the south side.

I.    Public open space:

Kingsholm & Wotton has a low level of public open space as identified in the city council’s open spaces strategy. The council’s standard is 2.8ha per 1000

Based on the new ward boundaries introduced at the 2016 election the ward has just 0.49ha per 1,000 population. Or 3.59ha for a population based on mid 2016 of 7,259 persons.

An opportunity is being missed in the proposed development to achieve a good increase in public open space provision in the ward by the wholesale development of the site, which was formerly used for sport and recreation.

I would recommend that this appeal is dismissed.

‘Suspend city council office move’ say Liberal Democrats

 

Jeremy Hilton & Declan Wilson with 92-96 Westgate Street in the background. This would be the new, much smaller customer advice centre for the city council. Drop in appointments to be ended.

Gloucester City Council should suspend its planned move of its offices to Shire Hall, say the Lib Dems. The current plan is for the city council to be based on the fifth floor at Shire Hall from 1st April 2019. Shire Hall is the headquarters of the county council.

The Liberal Democrat group says the business planning behind the project is ill thought out and the office accommodation will be temporary, too small and the financial savings unsound.

Lib Dem group leader, Cllr. Jeremy Hilton said:

“Gloucester City Council under Conservative control really is becoming a ‘vanishing council’. The council lacks ambition and is unable to plan long term. The Conservative administration is exhausted and has run out of good ideas. Moving to Shire Hall is a desperate stop gap position. It attempts to save money but doesn’t. The move should be suspended to allow for a full reappraisal.

“The accommodation at Shire Hall and 92-96 Westgate Street amounts to just 1,175 sqm. This is 78% smaller in size compared to the 5,290 sqm at Herbert, Kimberley and Phillpotts warehouses at the Docks. The Tory cabinet has still not provided opposition councillors with the plans on how it will all be squeezed into such a small space. The public reception advice centre on Westgate Street will be tiny, just 123 sqm compared to current 377 sqm.

“The council has yet to secure an agreement with the Canals & River Trust about altering the covenant on Herbert, Kimberley and Phillpotts warehouses. Until this is sorted, the buildings cannot be put up for sale. We must not leave these grade II listed buildings empty whilst we find a buyer. In the past, two empty warehouses in the Docks have been destroyed by arson. This could happen again. We should not move out until we have sold the buildings to new owners who have obtained planning permission.

“The city council needs to acquire new accommodation for the long term. It requires space to grow, especially if the council ends the Amey streetcare contract and brings the service back in house. We should build new offices in the Kings Quarter next to the new bus station. This would help kickstart the regeneration of the immediate area. It would be a bold move repeating the success of the council’s move to the Docks in the 1980’s.

Lib Dem deputy leader, Declan Wilson agreed:

“The move to Shire Hall is poorly thought out. The financial savings are unsound. The council will still have to pay business rates, the Docks service charge, insurance and security amounting to well over £250,000 per year on HKP warehouses until they have been sold. This is more than double the £102,000 savings suggested in the cabinet report. The council must reassess. The business plan is flawed.”

Lib Dems demand action over bins fiasco in Gloucester

Gloucester Liberal Democrats are demanding the Conservative-run city council takes action over persistent poor performance by waste collection contractors Amey.

Lib Dem councillors have tabled a motion for debate at a meeting of the city council on July 12, which calls on the Conservative cabinet to sort out the recent problems that have hit Amey.

Around 2,000 tonnes of recycled waste – collected from outside residents’ homes – has disappeared amid allegations from a whistleblower that some has been sent to landfill.

The Lib Dems have previously described both Amey and the Conservative cabinet as “utterly useless” in their management of the waste collection service.

Councillor Richard Cook, the cabinet member for the environment, recently told the scrutiny committee that just over 2,000 tonnes of recyclable waste had gone missing with a market value of £246,000.

The controversy comes just months after a string of cancelled collections over the Christmas and New Year break.

Households saw recycling build up for days over the end-of-year period when civic chiefs and Amey decided the icy road conditions with snow were too risky for crews.

Lib Dem group leader Councillor Jeremy Hilton, who represents Kingsholm & Wotton, is moving the motion.

“The council has a multi-million pound streetcare contract with Amey PLC,” he said.

“It is unbelievable that 2,000 tonnes of household waste has just disappeared. The contractor Amey and the cabinet who oversee the contract need to sort out this problem.

“We are demanding that the cabinet member ups his game. He should be meeting Amey once a month rather than quarterly.”

Lib Dem deputy group leader Councillor Declan Wilson, who will second the motion, added:

“The loss of £246,000, which is the value of the lost 2,000 tonnes of recyclable waste, will have a negative impact on the council’s balance sheet.

“There is so much we could do to improve council services with a quarter of a million pounds. The Tory cabinet must do better.”

Ends…

Motion for debate

“This council records its dissatisfaction with the household waste collection services operated by the council’s contractor Amey PLC.

This council notes that 2,000 tonnes of recyclable waste is unaccounted for with a market value of £246,000 and that there are stories of recyclable household waste being inappropriately sent to landfill.

This council also raises concerns about the quality of the client side management of the streetcare contract overseen by the cabinet.

This council, therefore, calls upon the cabinet member for the environment to up his game and increase the frequency of meetings he holds with Amey PLC from current quarterly meetings to monthly meetings until the matter of poor performance by Amey PLC is resolved.”

Proposed by Jeremy Hilton
Seconded by Declan Wilson

 

Empty offices leave public services £700,000 short in lost business rates

Isabel Brazil & Jeremy Hilton chat with 69 London Road in background

Gloucester City Council has been unable to collect nearly £700,000 in business rates because two office blocks in Gloucester have been laid empty for years.

The HM Revenue & Customs reduced the rateable value on 67 and 69 London Road to zero meaning the owners, Pall Mall Estates, do not have to pay business rates on either property.

It is understood that HMRC reduced the valuation to zero on the August 29, 2011.

Before the reduction the rateable value of both properties stood at £269,500 and meant that business rates were worth £118,732 per year to Gloucester City Council.

The properties were subject to a debate at the city council in May led by Liberal Democrat councillors Jeremy Hilton and Isabel Brazil, who represent Kingsholm Ward.

Their motion was passed unanimously calling for the buildings to be acquired for residential redevelopment, with a Compulsory Purchase Order being used if a reasonable purchase terms could not be agreed.

Councillor Hilton said: “The owners stripped out the services within the buildings a few years ago. This probably helped them secure a zero rating on their business rates.

“The loss of £700,000 in business rates since 2011 is scandalous. I understand the owners have had offers from potential buyers but turned them down.

“If they had to pay business rates on the office blocks they may have sold them by now.

“Private householders aren’t allowed to hang on to empty properties for year after year and not pay any council tax.

“Why should wealthy corporations get away with not paying their fair share of taxes? The system is corrupt.

Councillor Isabel Brazil said: “The buildings are run down and can no longer be easily let.

“The owners shouldn’t be allowed to sit on a property asset for year after year and not pay tax on them.

“The £700,000 lost in business rates could of been spent on supporting public services.”

Vanishing council to lock front doors once a month

Liberal Democrat leader, Cllr. Jeremy Hilton has responded to the decision of the Conservative controlled Gloucester City Council to close its customer advice reception and contact centre to the public on the last Wednesday of every month. The first closure will be on the 30th of May.

Cllr. Hilton has described the decision made by Cllr. David Norman as another example of the ‘vanishing council’.

Cllr.Jeremy Hilton (Lib Dem – Kingsholm & Wotton) said:

“Under Conservative control the city council continues to contract and services to the community diminish. It has certainly become a ‘vanishing council’.

“Last year the cabinet cut the hours the reception was open every day. It now closes at 3pm rather than 5pm as it once did. In future the doors will be closed once a month for a whole day.

“Residents arriving at the council on the last Wednesday of the month will be shocked and annoyed to see the doors locked to the council offices. If they phone the contact centre they will find their call will be unanswered. They will be frustrated they cannot speak to a person face to face to help solve their enquiry.

“Due to staff cuts imposed by the Tories, the council’s customer service team is overstretched and no longer has the resilience to cope with the demands placed on it.

“A good council would keeps its customer reception and contact centre open every working day. It should be able to organise staff training without locking the front doors.

“This vanishing council is letting the people of Gloucester down. It’s customer advice reception and contact centre should be open every day Monday to Friday.”

Any new court should be in Gloucester city centre, say Lib Dem’s

Jeremy Hilton outside the Crown Court building in Gloucester

There are calls for a new civil justice centre to be built in Gloucester city centre rather than in Quedgeley.

Liberal Democrat group leader Councillor Jeremy Hilton said that if a new crown, county and magistrates court complex was to be built in the city then it should be in a central location, rather than at the Waterwells business park.

There is now only one magistrates court operating in Gloucestershire, which is in Cheltenham, after Gloucester and Stroud’s shut in 2015 as part of a nationwide closure programme.

Councillor Hilton spoke out after it emerged that Conservative MPs Richard Graham and Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown have met recently with Chief Constable Rod Hansen and Police and Crime Commissioner Martin Surl to discuss lobbying the Government for a new crown and magistrates court next to Gloucestershire Police HQ.

“There is no doubt that Gloucester needs a new court complex. Gloucester’s magistrates court was rather dilapidated for several years before it finally closed,” Councillor Hilton, who represents Kingsholm Ward, said.

“Gloucester’s crown court is a lovely 19th century building and a proper old courtroom but it is also in poor condition and needs updating.

“If is justice is to be served then it needs to be accessible to everyone from across Gloucestershire.

“With the new court located in the city centre it would be close to the bus and rail stations and also have good parking facilities.”

Councillor Hilton added: “A potential site for the new court building could be as part of the Kings Quarter development.

“A new court in Gloucester could also mean that high-profile and more serious cases are dealt with in the city rather than people having to travel to Bristol.”

Lib Dem councillors want to use compulsory purchase powers to acquire 67/69 London Road

Jeremy Hilton with the run down buildings on London Road in the background

Liberal Democrat councillors for Kingsholm & Wotton, Jeremy Hilton & Isabel Brazil have issued a challenge to the Tory run city council to acquire 67/69 London Road for a housing development.

The two former office buildings on London Road have remained empty for many years and they are deteriorating and becoming eyesores within an important conservation area.

The annual meeting of the city council (21st May) will debate a motion proposed by Jeremy Hilton & seconded by Isabel Brazil calling on the council to acquire the dilapidated buildings for housing.

Cllr Hilton said: “Local residents are fed up with these empty buildings being an eyesore on London Road. Our motion hopefully, will get things moving.”

Cllr. Isabel Brazil agreed: “The buildings are run down and can no longer be easily let. The draft city plan suggests at least 30 residential units could be provided on the site. The council should now buy the properties for a housing project.”

The motion from the Kingsholm & Wotton councillors calls for compulsory purchase powers to be used if reasonable terms cannot be agreed.

Jeremy Hilton concluded: “The owners have failed look after the properties, we cannot allow them to continue to remain empty for year after year.

“The council must now buy them for a new housing project, using some of the £80m it set aside for such developments. If a negotiated purchase fails the council must use compulsory purchase powers to acquire the site.”

Ends….

Text of motion lodged with city council (dated 1st May 2018 11:12 am)

“This council notes that both 67 and 69 London Road, former offices, have been empty for a number of years and that these buildings are continuing to deteriorate.

They have become an eyesore on London Road, which is a conservation area and also one of the main routes into the city centre.

This council also notes that the combined site is listed in the draft city plan as being suitable for residential development.

This council, therefore, asks the leader to use city council resources to acquire 67 and 69 London Road for a residential regeneration project.

This council also agrees that the city council should use compulsory purchase powers to acquire the site if reasonable purchase terms cannot be agreed by negotiation with the current landowner.”

Proposed by Jeremy Hilton

Seconded by Isabel Brazil

Air Pollution report published

Tackling air pollution in Gloucestershire from vehicle emissions is set to be an important priority for Gloucestershire County Council. Today the report of the air pollution task group, chaired by Cllr. Jeremy Hilton (Lib Dem Kingsholm & Wotton), is published.

According to Public Health England, poor air quality is the largest environmental risk to public health in the UK, and the Royal College of Physicians has estimated that poor air quality is responsible for 40,000 premature deaths in the UK annually.

Exposure to air pollution can affect health by contributing to the development of cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and respiratory diseases, and can limit an individual’s quality of life.

Cllr. Jeremy Hilton said: “Public bodies in Gloucestershire need to do much more to reduce vehicle air pollution. We have a number of poor air quality hot spots in the county. Nitrogen Dioxides and particulate matter from vehicle emissions is a hazard to everyone’s health in the county. We have to take action to reduce these pollutants.

“I shall be taking the report of the air pollution task group to the Environment & Community Scrutiny Committee next week, where I hope it is approved, before it is sent on to the county cabinet on the 6th of June.”

The report has a dozen recommendations that include the establishment of a Gloucestershire Air Quality Partnership to oversee future work. This will be helped by better air quality monitoring with a focus on particulate matter. Changes to planning policies are suggested. Highway interventions are recommended to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.

The task group wishes to encourage the greater use of electric vehicles and also to set stronger targets to increase journeys by bicycle, on foot and public transport. It wants to see the use low emissions buses etc.

Cllr Hilton concluded: “This report is just a start. I would like to that everyone who came along to the workshop we held in January and to the members of the air pollution task group that helped draft the report.”