Agenda item - Member Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by Members:

 

(a)          Petitions: To receive any petitions;

 

(b)          Written Questions: To consider any written questions;

 

(i)            Zone G Parking- Councillor Hill

 

(c)          Letters: To consider any letters;

 

(i)            Tree Management Strategy- Councillor Janio and Councillor Druitt

 

(ii)          Waste Enforcement- Councillor Janio and Councillor Greenbaum

 

(iii)         Hangleton Public Toilets- Councillor Janio, Councillor Barnett and Councillor Lewry

 

(d)          Notices of Motion: to consider any Notices of Motion referred from Full Council or submitted directly to the Committee.

 

(i)            Extending Enforcement of Grass Verge Parking

 

(ii)          Use of Pesticides

 

 

(b)      Written Questions

 

(i)           Zone G Parking- Councillor Hill

 

7.1         Councillor Hill was unable to attend the meeting. The Chair provided the following written response to the question.

 

“Overall we have issued 105 Resident permits in total for Zone G.

In Ditchling Gardens we have currently issued 17 permits and there are currently 26 Resident permit parking places available. Ditchling Close is a private area and no permits have been issued.

88 resident permits have been issued in Hollingbury Road and there are 102 Resident permit only spaces and 16 shared permit/paid spaces.

The Council has undertaken an extensive and detailed two stage consultation process for these schemes which have received full support. Therefore, as part of the overall process we intend to undertake a period of monitoring. If there are continued difficulties for residents in Ditchling Road and surrounding areas with their Area J permit and a number of spaces remain in Ditchling Gardens this should be evidenced in a deputation or petition to a future Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee. Residents should also outline exactly their properties that would require an Area G permit i.e. those with a back garden onto Ditchling Gardens”.

 

(c)      Letters

 

(i)           Tree Management Strategy- Councillors Janio and Druitt

 

7.2         Councillor Janio presented a letter requesting the committee consider a report within the next six months consisting of a schedule of work that would review the council’s existing Tree Management Strategy whilst also recommending to the Economic Development & Culture Committee that they consider whether a new Supplementary Planning Document on Trees should be added to the City Plan Part 2 Framework.

 

7.3         The Chair provided the following response:

 

“Thank you for your letter which sets out the important role of trees have in the city.

In terms of the Tree and Woodland Strategy I can confirm this was updated and agreed in 2008 in response to the 2007 Scrutiny Report. This sets out a clear strategy for managing the city’s stock of trees and is available on the council’s website. We can provide you with a link to the document. 

In terms of planning decisions - there is a clear planning framework for assessing the impact of new development proposals on existing trees and prioritising planting of new trees particularly to improve the public realm. There are policies relating to trees in the Local Plan (QD11 Trees and Hedgerows) and the City Plan Part One (CP10 Biodiversity and CP13 Public Streets and Spaces). Detailed planning guidance on Trees and Development Sites (a supplementary planning document) was adopted in 2006.  I am advised that the City Parks Team is currently looking at the wording of the standard planning conditions.

There is also an opportunity to address more detailed policy issues on trees in Part 2 of the City Plan – the Scoping Document was agreed recently and will be out consultation on 30 June for three months. You will have an opportunity to raise matters relating to policies for tree protection and planting in your comments on this.”

 

7.4         Councillor Janio stated that he was pleased to hear that this issue was being considered and that a Tree & Woodland Strategy existed as he had been informed otherwise by officers.

 

7.5         RESOLVED- That the Letter be noted.

 

(ii)          Waste Enforcement- Councillors Janio and Greenbaum

 

7.6         Councillors Greenbaum and Janio presented a letter that outlined concerns regarding the conduct of the recently appointed contractor responsible for enforcement of anti-social waste and asked that a monitoring report detailing the results and feedback of the service be brought to the committee.

 

7.7         The Chair provided the following response:

 

“As part of the new strategy to reduce waste, increase recycling and have cleaner streets that was approved by this Committee and P&R Committee last year, it was agreed that we need to do something about the scourge of littering and fly-tipping, among other environmental crimes.  

When that report was agreed, it committed to bringing a report before the committee after six months of operation and there will be a full update when we meet in October. 

Cllr Greenbaum, Richard Bradley the Acting Director and myself have had email correspondence about this over the past weeks and it has been made very clear that an update report on the service will come to ET&S Cttee in October in line with the recommendations to this committee and to P&R. That has never been in doubt but I am happy to confirm it again.”

 

7.8         RESOLVED- That the Letter be noted.

 

(iii)         Hangelton Public Toilets- Councillors Barnett, Janio & Lewry

 

7.9         The Committee considered a letter from Councillors Barnett, Janio and Lewry that requested to keep the public toilets in Greenleas open all year round and to reverse the decision for closure of the public toilets sited at the Grenadier Parade.

 

7.10      The Chair provided the following response:

 

“Thank you for your letter and I can appreciate your concerns as ward councillors for this area.  

You will remember that when the council’s budget was set and supported by the Conservative Group, both the Labour Administration and the Conservative Group had put additional resources back into the public toilet budget.  Unfortunately this did still leave a £40,000 saving to be made in that budget so officers had to work up proposals to set criteria to deliver those savings

The only way that savings of that magnitude can be realised is by either reducing opening hours or by closing some sites completely.

The criteria for analysing each site was based upon:

 

•   Level of Usage

•   Destination park/green flag

•   Distance to alternative toilets

•   Condition surveys

•   Could opening/attendance be reduced without reducing the level of service

•   Winter opening

•   Investment required

•   Future charging

•   Contractor and operational feedback

 

Unfortunately, the sites in Hangleton did not rank high enough to be prioritised with the reduced funding available. 

I appreciate that will be a disappointment to you and your fellow ward councillors and I would be happy to consider any alternative arrangements should you have any ideas or suggestions to that end.”

 

7.11      RESOLVED- That the Letter be noted.

 

(d)  Notices of Motion

 

(i)           Extending Enforcement of Grass Verge Parking

 

7.12      The Committee considered a Notice of Motion referred from the Full Council meeting of 24 March 2016 that recommended the Committee extension of the current limited grass verge parking enforcement scheme to other areas of the city and options to do so be presented in a report to the committee at the earliest available opportunity, subject to resources.

 

7.13      The Chair provided the following response to the Motion:

 

“There are a number of issues to consider to take this forward.

Firstly there are the costs involved as recent no verge schemes in Mile Oak and the Surrenden area cost between £20,000 to £40,000.

Secondly there are the staff resources to undertake this work as currently project officers are busy dealing with an agreed parking scheme timetable. 

In addition to the lack of financial and staff resources, we need to consider the displacement effects of continuing with a road by road approach or to see if a citywide prohibition may be possible – as in London.

We have contacted the Department for Transport to see if this would be possible and where areas suitable for footway parking could be signed as such.

We have received a reply from Andrew Jones MP, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, stating that “The DfT is at the stage of taking forward the concerns raised and we are examining the scope of research needed which will look more closely at the legal and financial implications of an alternative regime and the likely impacts on local authorities.

He goes on to say that the DfT would welcome input from this council as part of its evidence gathering.  

I would propose that we continue to liaise closely with the DfT and lobby for these powers to be given to us.”

 

7.14      RESOLVED- That the Committee notes the Notice of Motion.

 

(ii)          Use of Pesticides

 

7.15      As per minute Item 6 paragraph 6.4.