Agenda and minutes

Consideration was given to the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13^th May, 2026.

Agreed:-  That the minutes of the meeting held on 13^th May, 2026, be approved as a correct record of proceedings.

There were no matters arising.

The Transportation Advisory Group noted the questions and answers on transport matters that had been submitted in advance of the meeting that had been included in the agenda pack.

Further to question 1 from Councillor Tinsley, he asked if it would be possible to consider either a shuttle bus or look at the road layout as there was a layby that potentially could be a turning point for the bus.

Agreed:- (1)  That SYMCA/Council consider the above suggestion.

Further to question 4 from Councillor Currie with regard to the No. 139 bus service, it was agreed at the February meeting that a meeting be held with SYMCA and Rotherham Community Transport (RCT) to look at possible ways of connecting the communities particularly for the elderly to access the church and shops. 

Adrian Parkinson replied that RCT could look at it as they were already active in the area most days and could consider any requests whether they be on an individual basis or specific times a specific bus was required.

Councillor Currie would speak to the community groups concerned and draw a plan up.  He would then contact Adrian to discuss.

Further to question 5 from Parish Councillor Bob Croxton, he emphasised the total lack of consultation regarding the Mill Lane road closure.  This has not been helped by the wrong timetables being posted out which had added to the confusion. 

The shuttle bus was going through the Waverley estate and not going past where everyone wanted it to go i.e. AMP and Morrisons/Boundary Mill but put it through the Waverley estate where there were no bus stops.  The Rotherham bound buses were going the opposite way round the village to the way the normal bus did.

Sam Millington, SYMCA, explained that the Bus Services Team had been made aware of the proposed closures very late in the day.  Due to the late notice, consultation had taken place with the local Councillors that arranged a meeting between Andrew Simpton, Richard Turner, Treeton Parish Council and Councillor Baggaley where follow-up points were made.  The timetable was changed and reduced to an hourly service from the proposed 30 minute service because it was extended through to Swallownest, Waverley, Woodhouse Mill and Catcliffe.

The service was already registered to run past Morrisons although it was acknowledged that the online information had been incorrect.  The service was provided to connect Swallownest and Handsworth for buses through to Sheffield, however, due to resource limitations, the service could not be run all the way through to Sheffield but needed to run the service through to Canklow roundabout.  The extra 7 minutes from Canklow to Rotherham made it feasible to run it through to Rotherham Interchange where people could transfer to the TramTrain or other services.

There had been a combination of factors and SYMCA took full responsibility and apologised.  Due to changes to SYMCA’s internal processes, this had been flagged and the process would be reviewed to ensure it did not happen again. 

Bob  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

On Demand Service Trial

The new service was to be launched on 30^th July at Dinnington. 

The On Demand Service would pick up either door-to-door or at local bus stops and you would be able to go through to the transport hubs and local stations including Meadowhall.  It would facilitate on demand response transport including Rotherham interchange, Kiveton Park, Kiveton Bridge, Woodhouse, Darnall and Sheffield Business Park.

The service would start next month and run for 12 months.

Agreed:-  (1)  That the map showing the areas served in the south of the Borough by the trial as well as information on the DRT project be shared with the Group.

Service Changes

A small number of service changes had taken place over the previous weekend:-

Service 3 Rotherham-Ravenfield Common – additional early morning and early evening trip giving an additional 2 hours throughout the day.  06:50  from Ravenfield and a later trip out of Rotherham Interchange to Ravenfield at 20:15.

Service 26 and 26a – small Crystal Peak/Thorp Salvin Service to improve punctuality.

Service 70a – change of operator on the Monday-Saturday evening service from TM Travel to First but almost the same timetable and route.

Service 71 – an additional early morning trip from Harthill through to Sheffield Monday to Saturdays and also Sunday.  Also a later evening trip which left Sheffield at 21:05 which ran as far as Swallownest.  This followed customer feedback in the Treeton area about the evening service from Sheffield.

Service 226 – minor changes to improve punctuality.

In September there would be 2 minor changes to school services.  The 06:20 which served Dinnington High School from Maltby would depart Maltby 5 minutes earlier but arrive at the school at the same time.

Service 664 from Low Valley in Wombwell through to Saint Pius Catholic School – it would be the same route and timetable  but the operator would change from LL Travel to Wilfreeda Bee.

Franchising

Franchising was still proceeding with the Rotherham local travel network scheduled to be in September 2028 as part of Tranche 2.  Trance 1 would include Olive Grove and Leger Way Services which included services X1, X2 and X3; those routes would run from either Doncaster or Sheffield.

SYMCA had been made aware of a supplier chain issue last week with regard to the pantographs at Rotherham Interchange.  Unfortunately there was no revised time for these works to be completed.  Work would still be ongoing with interim disruption throughout August and September.  Discussions were ongoing this week with regard to possible contingency.  Discussions would take place with Stagecoach as it affected their services.  However, there had been confirmation that A1 and A4 could be opened ahead of the work.

Service 114, introduced in April for Monday to Saturday evenings and Sundays, continued to remain in operation providing evening and Sunday connectivity to Herringthorpe and parts of East Dene.  This would continue to operate until at least Tranche 1.

In response to a question from Councillor Thorp regarding the Clean  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

(1)       First Group

(2)       Stagecoach

(3)       Rotherham Community Transport

First Group

Michael Moore provided the following update:-

-        There was a stable network in Rotherham until franchising and there would be no changes until that time except for some punctuality changes

-        Service X6 which ran to and from the motorway services at Catcliffe.  This was fully funded by Welcome Break, however, they had reduced their level of funding so as from 30^th August the 5 return journeys would be reduced to 3.  This was linked to their shift times

-        There had been some recent challenges in terms of drivers.  In order to support the operation First had brought in drivers from Bradford and Leeds and deployed them into Sheffield

-        Punctuality for the current period was up 1.5%

Stagecoach

John Young, Stagecoach, provided the following update:-

-        Period 3 had ended on 25^th July with performance running at 99.88% of all mileage (period 2 99.88%) with lost mileage of 0.02% (approximately 250 miles)

-        Punctuality was 87% (period 2 89%)

-        New ticket machines were to be delivered imminently and would be rolled out across all depots including those that would be franchising over the next 12-15 months.  They would improve the customer experience as the current machines were life expired and would be multi-purpose doubling up for drivers to perform first use checks on a vehicle in a morning

-        Network Stability Agreement in place, which was good news for everyone, between now and franchising

-        There were a number of concerns relating to Rotherham Interchange and the views shared about the feeling of safety and security and certainly drivers at Rawmarsh compared Rotherham unfavourably with what they saw and experienced at Doncaster.  The closure of stands had caused a number of issues operationally which was challenging for drivers and customer.  The lack of toilet facilities on a consistent basis was another problem

-        The number of disruptions was increasing and the potential impact of those disruptions was often greater than they used to be probably due to a combination of factors but included increasing traffic volumes and revised safer ways of working for people on site

-        Another frustration for bus operators was, having been notified of a disruption/diversion, what actually happened on the ground being different to what had been notified.  As had been suggested earlier in the meeting, all agencies needed to work harder to try and get a better system in place to deal with this and notify others as it was one of the blockers to encourage people to use public transport

-        Bus journey speeds were reducing and had been for a long time; if  the same level of service was running slower then it meant that additional resources were needed which had the knock-on effect of increasing costs to the operator as well as making it less attractive to the customer 

Sam Millington reported that there were some ongoing works at Rotherham Interchange i.e. proposed new security camera system looking at the toilet entrance, installation of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

Richard Isaac, Northern Rail, had submitted his apologies for the meeting but had submitted the following information:-

-        The hot weather was causing issues with the fleet and infrastructure

-        Government approval had been received to progress to the next stage of receiving 37 x Class 350 units from Porterbrook to replace the Class 323s (Northern Rail’s oldest class of electric trains).  The Class 350s would bring additional benefits to the fleet offering customers an improved on-board experience, increased capacity, air conditioning and dedicated cycle spaces.  They would also receive modifications including improvements for better passenger experience and refreshed interiors

-        The introduction of Class 350s would not impact the procurement of brand new trains the programme for which was ongoing.  They offered a practical medium term response to the operational challenges you would soon expect to see with the Class 323s as they approached end-of-life

-        The first 5 trains were expected to be introduced late 2027 and expected to directly replace the Class 323s on their current South Manchester routes

Lucy Hudson, Head of Transportation Infrastructure, gave the following verbal update on the work of the Transport Infrastructure Service:-

Seminar

-        A Ward Road Safety Seminar was to be held at 1.00 p.m. on 29^th July

Minor Works Programme 2026-27

-        The Programme had been agreed

-        Work was taking place on the design process and how it could be delivered

Treeton Main Crossroads

-        A newsletter was to be produced regarding the bridge replacement

-        The working group met every month to discuss the research work and study into Treeton Crossroads and being very clear about what the problem in the area was and potential ideas to mitigate that in the future

Fleet Street Bridge

-        The Service had been invited to submit a more detailed bid although it was understood from the DfT that there had been a lot of interest in the funding

-        Additional support had been provided by the DfT to write the bid as it was recognised that some councils had very small teams/resources.  There was also access to a review team who provide pointers on what to include to create the strongest bid possible

Consultations

-        The 4 consultations – Rotherham East/Fitzwilliam Road, Broom Road/Wickersley Road, A6022 Proposed Improvements and A633 Broad Street – had all closed

-        Results and the implications of the consultations were now being reviewed to consider the way forward

Councillor Thorp reported that he was to hand in a petition the following day, containing in excess of 3,000 Borough-wide signatures, requesting that the Broom Road/Wickersley Road scheme be dropped completely or at least changed to road safety rather than cycle lanes.  The petition would be submitted to the September Council meeting and it was hoped that no decision would be made prior to that meeting.

The Chair confirmed that the Service was now working its way through all the results/feedback of all 4 consultations.  They would all be analysed and options drawn up based on the consultations to enable informed decisions to be made.  However, there were timeline pressures with regard to the use of the funding; if a different decision was to be made it needed to be made sooner rather than later due to the implications of possibly not using/all the funding.

There was no other business for consideration.