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;

 

1)    Councillor Fishleigh- Whiteways Lane between Rottingdean and Saltdean

2)    Councillor Fishleigh- Vans and caravans at Black Rock

3)    Councillor Fishleigh- Proactive sea water testing in Brighton & Hove

4)    Councillor Fishleigh- Timescale for report on undercliff

5)    Councillor Nemeth- Speed Trials

6)    Councillor Nemeth- Welcome Back Fund

7)    Councillor Nemeth- City’s Flood Prevention works

 

(c)           Letters: To consider any letters;

 

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

(b)          Questions

 

(1)          Whiteways Lane between Rottingdean and Saltdean

 

23.1      Councillor Fishleigh put the following question:

 

“Whiteways Lane is a well-used path between Rottingdean and Saltdean which is very popular with walkers, cyclists and horse riders.

Unfortunately the path uneven and slippery in parts.  Please would the council visit with a view to making improvements”.

 

23.2      The following written response was provided:

 

“Thank you for your question, Cllr Fishleigh. Whiteways Lane is recognised as an important link between Saltdean and Rottingdean to the strategic Falmer Road corridor in both the Rights of Way Improvement Plan and the Local Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan.  These plans identify and prioritise routes to improve access provision for walkers, cyclists, horse riders and those with mobility difficulties. Both plans together ensure that city and countryside routes are joined up.

We do monitor the surface condition of routes and welcome reports of any issues.  The Rights Of Way Officer has been made aware of your suggestion for refurbishment, and the route will be reviewed as part of our consideration of future priorities and possible upgrade.  

The council’s website also has a Rights of Way page, where there is a link to enable people to report any problems”.

 

(2)          Vans and caravans at Black Rock

 

23.3      Councillor Fishleigh put the following question:

 

“Why does it seem to residents that the vans and caravans that stay overnight in the bus-only parking bays and paid-for bays don’t receive parking tickets?”

 

23.4      The following written response was provided:

 

“The bus and coach parking bays at Black Rock are signed as operating from 10am to 6pm during which time payment to park is required and enforcement is carried out within these times and any vehicles parking illegally during this period are issued tickets. Outside of these restricted hours any vehicle can park there without payment”.

 

(3)          Proactive sea water testing in Brighton & Hove

 

23.5      Councillor Fishleigh put the following question:

 

“Southern Water is working with Canterbury City Council and Havant Borough Council on a pilot project involving water quality testing buoys which give residents live updates on sea water pollution. Would BHCC please reach out to Southern Water to see if the trial can be extended into Brighton and, if not, investigate similar systems that could be used along the city’s coast?”

 

23.6      The following written response was provided:

 

“The Leader of the Council chairs the local Water Quality Steering Group which includes representatives from the council, Surfers Against Sewage, the Environment Agency and Southern Water.  The next meeting is scheduled at the end of September and officers will raise your request with Southern Water then”.

 

(4)          Timescale for report on undercliff

 

23.7      Councillor Fishleigh put the following question:

 

“What is the process and timescales for researching and preparing a report about potential improvements to the Undercliff Walk?”

 

23.8      The following written response was provided:

 

“Although used and loved by many residents for walking and cycling the Undercliff is in fact classified as a sea defence.  It was built to prevent coastal and cliff erosion and in doing so protects the A259 and adjacent properties from collapsing into the sea.

The nature of the Undercliff at the base of the steep cliffs means that development of the area in terms of infrastructure is particularly complex and extremely expensive.  Running services such as water and electricity would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds which is money the council just does not have.  There is also limited useable space where infrastructure would not be at risk of damage from overtopping of shingle, waves or from chalk falls.

The council has made improvements in recent times where it has been possible to make use of the existing services.  For example,  Saltdean has a new beach shower and a new accessible beach boardwalk is due to be installed next month. The area outside the toilets has been resurfaced and new blue badge parking bays have been installed to enable those users who are less mobile to visit the seafront.  In Rottingdean 7 new bike stands will shortly be installed next to the beach. 

All of the litter bins from Brighton Marina to Ovingdean have been replaced with the new-style triple bins. These new bins have increased the capacity of litter bins along the Undercliff and provide residents and visitors with the option of on-the-go recycling. The public toilets at Saltdean Undercliff will undergo refurbishment this autumn following agreement of funds at Budget Council in February 2022. Funding options for refurbishing other toilets along the Undercliff continue to be explored.

A report considering further requests for improvements to the Undercliff will be presented at ET&S Committee when the preparatory work has been completed.  This is likely to be early in the new year”.

 

(5)          Speed Trials

 

23.9      Councillor Nemeth read the following question:

 

“Despite the great efforts of the organisers of the Brighton Speed Trials, there was huge disappointment again amongst motor-racing enthusiasts concerning the non-participation of motorcycles.

The decision to not allow motorcycles ultimately stems from a decision by the Auto-Cycle Union (ACU) to not grant a track licence following concerns about surface materials. Last year, there were concerns about the green cycle lane. This year, there were concerns over the type of white paint that has been used for line markings.

The ACU has clearly stated that there are suitable types of white paint which are available for the job in question.

Given that this Council resolved to ensure that this event continues – with no excuses or caveats – please detail precisely what conversations and meetings took place (with dates) with the appropriate licensing authorities prior to the paint being administered”.

 

23.10   The Chair provided the following reply:

 

“Thank you for your question. You were advised by officers that as this question relates to events the question should have gone to TECC committee. The next TECC committee is on the 3rd November”.

 

23.11   Following a discussion between the Chair and Councillor Nemeth it was agreed to send a written response to the question which is as follows:

 

“Following approval at ETS committee to procced with proposals to implement a dedicated cycle track along Madeira Drive plans were further developed. In February 2021 the plans were circulated to key stakeholders including Madeira Drive Event Organisers via our Events Team. During this period e-mail exchanges with many traders and event organisers took place and meetings were held on site. More specifically e-mail exchanges between the Speed Trial Event organiser and BHCC officers regarding the plans took place. In February 2021 a site meeting took place with the organiser of the Speed Trials to identify measures to ensure the layout was suitable. In March 2021 the plans were updated to incorporate change requests to respond to the needs of the event. These changes included removable signposts in the carriageway, removal of proposed buildouts at proposed crossing points to allow sufficient clearance for motor vehicles and the addition of extra safety bollards to protect the Concorde 2 building.  In August 2021 Speed Trial organisers requested a further meeting with UK Motorsport and BHCC to detail highway changes and to prepare for the Licencing application. During this meeting the green surfacing specification was requested alongside skid resistance testing. This was circulated directly after the meeting to all attendees.  During August BHCC officers were copied into an e-mail between Event Organisers and the Licencing Body detailing all required safety measures that had been put in place. On the lead up to the event all other works at the Dukes Mound end were stopped and temporary measures put in place to ensure the licenced event could take place.

In December 2021 BHCC Events, Highways, Event Managers and Licence bodies attended a meeting to discuss previous events. Some concern was  raised over the white lining with Event organisers offering to circulate the specification used on the Isle of Man. BHCC agreed to determine the specification of the existing white lining

In March 22 –July 22  the white lining specification was received by BHCC contractors and sent to a representative from the event organisation. The specification for the white lining laid at Madeira Drive by our experienced contractor are developed for use on all Local Highway roads and can be found Citywide”.

 

(6)          Welcome Back Fund

 

23.12   Councillor Nemeth read the following question:

 

“A response to a written question at Full Council on 7th April 2022 confirmed broad funding arrangements for the five high streets to which the Welcome Back Fund applied.

The project included both planting and street-cleaning elements.

Please now provide a full breakdown of costings for each street along with an explanation as to why plants were picked that immediately died”.

 

23.13   The Chair provided the following reply:

 

“It’s not possible to provide a full breakdown of all costs for each street in the time available before this committee. The ordering of information according to street was not required by the government as financial reporting for the fund. The Welcome Back Funds were committed and reclaimed from government by 31st March 2022.  Government approved the city council’s plans, in consultation with local representatives, for funding to be spent on beautification such as planters, hanging baskets, floor and other surface vinyls, temporary signage and deep cleans of the high streets.

The total amount spent on local high streets was £132,858.25.

I am sorry to hear the comment that the plants died immediately. We did not receive any complaints or feedback regarding this at the time and I cannot respond further on this.”

 

23.14   Councillor Nemeth asked the following supplementary question:

 

“Will that information be sent soon?”

 

23.15   The following response was provided on behalf of the Chair:

 

“It will take some time to go back through the £132,000 and split it down according to each street. If you would like that we can do it, but it will take quite some time”.

 

(7)          City’s Flood Prevention Works

 

23.16    Councillor Nemeth read the following question:

 

“The Council’s main infrastructure response to the flood risk in Brighton & Hove has now concluded having only been half completed.

SCAPE, which was launched in 2017 after having been funded by an external grant, was planned to be rolled out over four phases between 2017 and 2020.  However following council delays, only phases 1 and 2 (Darcey Drive and the top of Carden Avenue) have been delivered.  Phases 3 and 4 (bottom of Carden Avenue and Norton Road) have been left incomplete with no indication as to whether or when they will ever be undertaken, causing concern from residents living in these flood prone areas.

Can the Chair inform the Committee of the reasons why this important project has been left incomplete and residents left in the dark and advise whether the Administration has any plans to complete the incomplete phases that might reassure the residents living in these areas?”

 

23.17   The Chair provided the following reply:

 

“The SCAPE project was a European 2-seas Interreg research project. This project had limited funding, so it was necessary to deliver a SuDS scheme to the available budget. 

While the SuDS scheme could not be completed to the lower end of Carden Avenue and Norton Road, the properties which had been identified at flood risk had property level protection provided in 2019/20 as part of the Property Level Protection programme. 

Whilst the full installation of the SuDS raingardens at Carden Avenue and Darcy Drive was incomplete, the scheme should be considered a success.

During the recent period of extreme rainfall, no properties in the Carden Avenue area reported flooding. 

The Flood Risk Management Team are looking at applying the lessons learned from the Carden Avenue pilot to deliver SuDS opportunities around the city”.

 

23.18   Councillor Nemeth put the following supplementary question:

 

Beyond the four areas outlined in the SCAPE project, does the Council have a further priority list of areas in the city that need flood prevention works undertaken and if not, will the Chair commence the work to draw up a list as soon as possible?”

 

23.19   The following reply was provided on behalf of the Chair:

 

“It is planned at the moment that a new annual report will come to committee in November outlining where the new ones will be”.

 

(d)      Notices of Motion

 

(1)          Rubbish Collection

 

23.20   Councillor Nemeth moved the following Notice of Motion:

 

This Committee:

 

1. Notes the financial offer of £859,000 per annum to settle the refuse strikes of 5-19 October 2021 and the lack of any significant improvement in the normal refuse and recycling collection service since then, including the continued issues of missed collections all over the city and low recycling rates; and

 

2. Resolves to call for a report detailing how there will be an improvement to the service for residents.

 

23.21   Councillor Bagaeen formally seconded the Notice of Motion.

 

23.22   Councillor Wilkinson moved the following amendment to the Notice of Motion as shown in bold italics and strikethrough:

 

2.    Notes Labour’s motion to Council in February, ‘Council Service Delivery’, and offer of working cross-party to help resolve long-standing issues with the delivery of basic services such as rubbish and recycling collections; and

 

3.    Resolves to call for a report detailing how there will be an improvement to the service for residents.

 

23.23   Councillor Platts formally seconded the amendment.

 

23.24   The Chair put the amendment to the vote that passed.

 

23.25   Resolved-

 

This Committee:

1.            Notes the financial offer of £859,000 per annum to settle the refuse strikes of 5-19 October 2021 and the lack of any significant improvement in the normal refuse and recycling collection service since then, including the continued issues of missed collections all over the city and low recycling rates; and

2.            Notes Labour’s motion to Council in February, ‘Council Service Delivery’, and offer of working cross-party to help resolve long-standing issues with the delivery of basic services such as rubbish and recycling collections; and

3.            Resolves to call for a report detailing how there will be an improvement to the service for residents.

 

(2)          Failure to Keep Pavements Safe and Tidy

 

23.26   Councillor Nemeth moved the following Notice of Motion:

 

This Committee resolves to:

 

1.    Note the ineffectiveness of the Council’s current policy of keeping pavements free of weeds;

 

2.    Recognise that the Council has a statutory duty to keep pavements free of weeds; and

 

3.    Requests an officer report which considers reversing the Administration’s unilateral decision of 27^th June 2019, and subsequent ETS Committee decision of 26^th November 2019 to stop weeding the pavements effectively, with options for a new policy that is both cost-effective and environmentally friendly that can be developed and trialled around the city.

 

23.27   Councillor Bagaeen formally seconded the Notice of Motion.

 

23.28   Councillor Platts moved the following amendment to the Notice of Motion as shown in bold italics and as struckthrough below:

This Committee resolves to:

1.    Note the ineffectiveness of the Council’s current efforts in policy of keeping pavements free of weeds;

3.    Notes Labour’s budget amendments that secured additional funding to tackle weeds on pavements across the city;

4.      Requests an officer report which considers reversing the Administration’s unilateral decision of 27th June 2019, and subsequent ETS Committee decision of 26th November 2019 to stop weeding the pavements effectively, with options for a newalternative methods of weed removal policy that are is both cost-effective and environmentally friendly that can be developed and trialled around the city, and for ongoing consideration of other methods.

 

23.29   Following a debate by the committee, the Chair put the amendment to the vote that was passed.

 

23.30   Resolved-

 

This Committee resolves to:

1.            Note the ineffectiveness of the Council’s current efforts in keeping pavements free of weeds;

2.            Recognise that the Council has a statutory duty to keep pavements free of weeds; and

3.            Notes Labour’s budget amendments that secured additional funding to tackle weeds on pavements across the city;

4.            Requests an officer report with options for alternative methods of weed removal that areboth cost-effective and environmentally friendly that can be developed and trialled around the city, and for ongoing consideration of other methods