Agenda and minutes

Venue: Bromley Civic Centre

Contact: Keith Pringle  020 8313 4508

Items
No. Item

54.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Ian Payne.  

 

Although present during the early and later stages of the meeting, Councillor David Jefferys apologised that he would have to leave part way through to attend another appointment.  

 

55.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Minutes:

There were no declarations.

 

56.

QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILLORS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ATTENDING THE MEETING

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to this Committee must be received in writing four working days before the date of the meeting. Therefore please ensure that questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on Wednesday 10th April 2013.

 

Minutes:

There were no questions to the Committee.

 

57.

MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENT PDS COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 5TH MARCH 2013 pdf icon PDF 187 KB

Minutes:

The minutes were agreed.

 

58.

QUESTIONS TO THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS ATTENDING THE MEETING

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to the Portfolio Holder must be received in writing four working days before the date of the meeting. Therefore please ensure that questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on Wednesday 10th April 2013.

Minutes:

Three questions were received from Mr Colin Willetts for written reply. Details of the questions and replies are at Appendix A along with questions submitted for the Committee’s previous meeting and their written replies.

 

59.

PRE-DECISION SCRUTINY OF REPORTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT PORTFOLIO HOLDER

The Environment Portfolio Holder to present scheduled reports for pre-decision scrutiny on matters where he is minded to make decisions.

59a

BUDGET MONITORING 2012/13 pdf icon PDF 80 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Report ES13039

 

Based on expenditure and activity levels to 31st January 2013, the 2012/13 controllable budget for the Environment Portfolio had been projected to under spend by £6k.

 

Details were provided of the 2012/13 projected outturn with a forecast of projected spend for each division compared to the latest approved budget. Background to variations was also outlined.

 

Report ES13039 also outlined expenditure against Member Priority Initiatives for the Environment Portfolio and progress of the selected projects. It also highlighted that the final payment of a European grant had been received for the Commerce project. This, together with the release of provisions made for the project totalled £97k. Subject to Executive approval, it was proposed to transfer this amount to the earmarked reserve, for any possible redundancy costs in future related to TfL funded staff.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Peter Fookes, it was confirmed that no TfL funded staff were being lost and there was no indication that LIP funding would cease. The proposed transfer of £97k to an earmarked reserve would be held to cover any possible redundancy costs for TfL funded staff should the costs not be able to be contained within LIP resources.

 

Councillor Julian Grainger questioned whether the projected shortfall for on and off-street parking could be attributed to current economic conditions. He felt the economy was currently stable and he sought evidence that economic conditions might have contributed to the shortfall. It was explained that fewer people overall were parking – less than originally projected. There was also a lower footfall in town centres. The downturn took place in the first year of the recession and parking demand had remained stagnant since then.

 

On enquiring whether there were shorter parking times or less parking, Councillor Grainger was advised that overall visits had reduced as had revenue from parking tickets.

 

Concerning rebates and credits of Cr £80k for street lighting electricity, it was indicated to Councillor Jefferys that this was associated with the terms of the street lighting energy contract where an adjustment was made in the following year for the difference between estimated electricity prices used compared to actual prices.

 

Highlighting the projected surplus within Trade Waste collection income, Councillor Reg Adams was pleased that the price increase from 1st April 2012 had not had a detrimental effect. With the previous year’s price increase for trade waste collections similarly not having a detrimental effect, Councillor Adams highlighted the advantage over two years of raising trade waste collection prices.

 

In response to a question from the Vice-Chairman, it was indicated that the Street Scene and Green Space review of back-office functions had been implemented as soon as was possible. There were delays in the planned closure of public conveniences as they were not closed until alternative provision was in place.

 

Referring to Winter Maintenance costs, Councillor Grainger highlighted a projected £100k variance for salt, gritting and snow clearance. Even though it had been a long cold winter, snow had not fallen to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59a

59b

CHISLEHURST AND ST. PAULS CRAY COMMONS CONSERVATORS - NOMINATIONS FOR ELECTION AND ANNUAL REPORT pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Minutes:

Report ES13040

 

Approval was sought for the re-appointment of two nominees to the Board of the Chislehurst and St Paul’s Cray Commons Conservators following expiry of their term of office during April 2013.

 

The Conservators had also carried a vacancy from 2011 and a further vacancy had been created following a retirement/resignation. Accordingly, Report ES13040 outlined the Trustees appointed by the Board since the previous nominations report to the Committee.

 

A member of the Board had also unexpectedly retired early during 2012, and with no additional nominations, it was proposed that the Board of Conservators be given authority to appoint a suitable new member in due course, should a volunteer with the necessary skills and attributes present themselves. This would need to be ratified via the next annual nominations report during 2014. In this context, the Chairman referred to an additional recommendation which had been tabled. This not only recommended that the Portfolio Holder authorise the Board of Conservators to appoint for the vacancy arising last year, but also for any future vacancies, provided details are reported to Members via the annual nominations report.

 

The Conservators Annual Report for 2012 was also provided.

 

RESOLVED that Environmental Portfolio Holder be recommended to:

 

(1)  note and approve the retirement and requests for re-standings set out more specifically at paragraph 3.3 of Report ES13040;

 

(2)  approve the new nominees within paragraph 3.3 of Report ES13040;

 

(3)  receive and note the Conservators Annual Report for 2012 (Appendix A to Report ES13040); and

 

(4)  authorise the Board of Conservators to appoint for the current vacancy referred to at paragraph 3.5 of Report ES13040, and for future vacancies, when a suitable candidate volunteers – reporting such details via the annual nominations report.

 

59c

TRAFFIC CONGESTION NEAR THE NUGENT CENTRE - PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNALS pdf icon PDF 186 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Report ES13021

 

Changes were recommended at the entrance to the Nugent Centre and nearby locations to reduce congestion and improve safety.

 

Traffic had increased since completion of the Nugent Centre and queuing, particularly from vehicles turning right on to Cray Avenue (A224), had delayed traffic. A staggered Pelican crossing south of the exit added to congestion with frequent crossings by shoppers across Cray Avenue. It was recommended that the crossing be removed and traffic signals added with pedestrian facilities at the Nugent Centre entrance. This would enable the “walk with traffic” design to be used, minimising delay as some traffic would be able to proceed while pedestrians were crossing.

 

Such a signal controlled junction would help control vehicles exiting and entering the retail park. Accidents would be reduced as each movement would have its own movement stage, avoiding give way operation. Additionally, shoppers would be more likely to park in the Nugent Centre car park as there would be a dedicated exit stage.

 

It was also recommended that the section of bus lane, currently suspended, be permanently removed. Although there might be a slight delay to buses, it was expected that their delays overall (in both directions) should be reduced by the improvements proposed.

 

At detailed design stage it was reported that there might be some changes, including a possible relocation of the bus stop on the southbound approach to the entrance, and the possible addition of a left turn filter lane into the Nugent Centre bypassing the new traffic signals.

 

As a next stage, it was also proposed to consider linking the Nugent Centre junction with the Leesons Hill traffic signals and use Urban Traffic Control (UTC) along much of the A224. By UTC, Transport for London could take direct control of any traffic signal, including crossings, when long traffic queues were detected. CCTV was usually required for visibility.

 

An options report was also proposed for considering improvements to the A224/Leesons Hill/Station Road junction and the A224/Station Approach junction.

 

Installing a no right turn ban at the A224/Leesons Hill junction during the Chislehurst Road bridge closure improved A224 traffic flow and reduced the number of injury accidents at the junction. It was recommended that the ban remain in place for congestion and safety reasons.  

 

Councillor Grainger asked why a signal controlled junction was preferred to a roundabout, which he felt would keep traffic moving. It was explained that a roundabout had been considered by officers but was not recommended. It would mean the existing pelican crossing would have to remain. The proposed new arrangements included a pedestrian phase in the traffic signals which was considered the best option by officers. Modelling figures for a roundabout would be provided to Councillor Grainger for information. Before arriving at a recommendation, Councillor Grainger indicated that he would have preferred to have seen more evidence on the roundabout option including associated traffic flow figures.

 

Councillor Grainger also suggested part time signals but it was thought that these might not have been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59c

59d

SERVICE ROAD TO SHOPS FRONTING SOUTHBOROUGH LANE/THE FAIRWAY, BROMLEY - PROPOSED MAKING-UP UNDER PRIVATE STREET WORKS PROCEDURE pdf icon PDF 114 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Report ES13036

 

The service roads on either side of the The Fairway, serving Nos. 187-211 Southborough Lane to the west and 213a-239 Southborough Lane to the east, had not been made-up and adopted. There had been a history of complaints about the condition of the roads, particularly the slab-paved footways which were in a poor condition.

 

The Council was entitled to make-up the footways for adoption under the provisions of the Private Street Works Code, referred to in the Highways Act 1980 and it was proposed that the Council meet the cost of the works, as enabled by S.236 of the Act, rather than recharge most of the cost to frontage owners.

 

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder be recommended to:

 

(1)  approve the layout for the footway in front of Nos. 187-211 Southborough Lane, as shown on drawing No. 11324-01-1;

 

(2)  approve the layout for the footway in front of Nos. 213a-239 Southborough Lane, as shown on drawing No. 11324-01-2; and

 

(3)  make a First Resolution under s.205(i) of the Highways Act 1980 in respect of the footways as follows:

 

  The Council do hereby declare that the footway in front of Nos. 187-239 Southborough Lane is not levelled, paved, metalled, flagged channelled and made good to its satisfaction and therefore resolves to execute street works therein, under the provisions of the Private Street Works Code, as set out in the Highways Act 1980.

 

  Schedule of Works

 

  Part 1 – From a point in line with the Western flank boundary of No. 187 Southborough Lane to the west, to the western boundary of the highway known as The Fairway to the east.

 

  Part 2 – From the eastern boundary of the highway known as The Fairway to the west, to a point in line with the eastern flank boundary of Nos. 237-239 Southborough Lane, to the east.

 

59e

PARKS AND GREENSPACE FEES AND CHARGES pdf icon PDF 153 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Report ES13038

 

Approval was sought to revise the existing charging policy for the Bromley Environmental Education Centre at High Elms (BEECHE) and introduce charges for outdoor fitness trainers using the Borough’s parks and open spaces commercially.

 

Report ES13038 outlined the revised BEECHE charges and reasoning for them. It also outlined proposed annual fees to outdoor fitness trainers, according to the number of clients and either one or two sessions per week. A rational for the proposed charges was also provided.

 

Potential income from the revised BEECHE charges, 2013/14 was compared to 2012/13 income. Estimated income from fees/charges to outdoor fitness trainers was also provided although it was not known how many applications would be received.

 

A system of registration, application and checking would need to be introduced for the fitness trainers. A personal trainer would need to apply and provide accredited Fitness Industry Association (FIA) approved training qualifications, risk assessment, lesson plan, Public liability Insurance document and a signed licence/agreement upon which a permit/licence would be issued. A draft licence was appended to Report ES13038.

 

Subject to revenue collection being economically viable, Councillor Adams felt that charging trainers was justified given that indoor trainers are charged for similar activity in leisure centres. From example fee ranges highlighted by officer research at Appendix 2 to Report ES13038, Councillor Adams favoured examples 1 or 3. Concerning the draft “Licence to operate”, he thought this seemed watertight from a Council viewpoint and he also asked whether the Council should be discretionary on the types of parks to use for fitness activities. In response, the Licence document was considered to provide a watertight agreement between fitness operators and the Council, putting the onus on the operator. For a trainer having between four and ten clients at one session per week, it was proposed to charge £250.

 

Without such licensing in operation, Councillor Adams enquired whether the Council would be liable if a member of the public incurred an injury at a Council owned park. Should there be unauthorised activity, it was suggested the Council would not be liable. Football teams were expected to pay for public liability insurance.

 

Councillor Samaris Huntington-Thresher suggested that enforcing a charging system could cost as much as the revenue obtained. Such a watertight licensing arrangement might also cause difficulties for some trainers and be off-putting. She asked how it was proposed to challenge individuals who might simply be a group of friends training. It was indicated that Ward Security personnel would speak to the individuals; the system was not proposed to be onerous and it was necessary for administration to be cost effective. It was proposed to report back to Members on how the system was working. The Chairman also highlighted a role for the Friends of Parks.

 

Councillor Grainger sought to understand the benefits trainers might receive from registering rather than operating unlicensed at different locations, including open land. He was also concerned that groups of joggers might be mistaken for trainers and clients.

 

It was suggested  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59e

59f

ENVIRONMENT PORTFOLIO PLAN 2013/16 pdf icon PDF 186 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Report ES13024

 

Members considered the draft Environment Portfolio Plan for 2013/16.

 

Report ES13024 also summarised the recommended priorities for the Plan, providing background on their significance as the key outcomes to be sought in 2013/16.

 

On expanding take up of the Green Garden Waste (GGW) collection service, the Chairman wanted to see a long-term target figure for the number of residents using the service. He also wanted a date in the plan for introducing a kerbside collection service for textiles. The aim of the GGW collection service was to reduce congestion around waste sites so a high take-up was preferred. The Chairman understood that other outer-London boroughs had high service take-ups so it should be achievable over the longer term. The Portfolio Holder indicated that this would increase incrementally.

 

Councillor Fookes highlighted an occurrence where notices had been left advising that vehicles were not to be parked in a street pending a thorough clean that was to take place. Vehicles were moved but the cleaning did not take place. He felt that improvements were necessary on informing residents of forthcoming events such as street cleans. The Chairman reminded Members and Officers of his suggestion at the Committee’s meeting on 15th January 2013 for the Council’s website to indicate when a street was last cleaned (and when future cleaning work was scheduled). He also asked that a specific commitment be made to improve street cleanliness. Councillor Fookes also suggested that the Council’s intranet system, “One Bromley”, indicate in chart form the responsibilities of officers. He also indicated that it was necessary to improve street cleaning in the area he represented. Where waste was being left in an area and in order to assist the successful prosecution of offenders, he advocated the use of CCTV to capture an incident of waste being deposited. 

 

On extending the trial use of a private enforcement company to issue fixed penalty notices for littering and dog fouling, Councillor Adams understood that the company had yet to issue a fixed penalty notice for dog fouling. He felt that serious effort was needed in this regard. The Portfolio Holder indicated that the company could be requested to have a focus on securing dog fouling prosecutions. He advocated trialling such an enforcement focus, suggesting a trial in Bromley based on a cross-party approach.

 

Councillor Grainger had a number of comments. In the context of recycling and waste, he referred to waste carpets being heavy and adding to landfill tax. He suggested that recycling carpet waste be considered. He supported the responsibilities of officers being available on One Bromley, highlighting functions in the Department and not simply job titles. On enforcement against dog fouling, and noting that owners often walked their dog early morning or at dusk, he hoped that enforcement officers would be on patrol during those times. He also advocated the use of figures instead of, or in addition to, percentages. On highway maintenance, he advocated maintenance works to lengths of roads as necessary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59f

60.

FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME, MATTERS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS, AND CONTRACTS REGISTER pdf icon PDF 184 KB

Minutes:

Report ES13025

 

Officers had anticipated a further meeting of the Parking Working Group in September 2013 subject to agreement at the Committee’s first meeting for 2013/14.

 

Members were also handed the following briefing papers for information:

 

  • Traffic and Road Safety Work programme
  • Update on Congestion Relief in Bromley and
  • Smarter Driving

 

The papers would be circulated to all Members and any comments were to be provided to the Head of Traffic and Road Safety. The Chairman added that the Work programme and Congestion papers fed into consideration of the annual LIP Programme which was considered by the Committee. The Chairman felt that the papers would be of interest to each Ward Member. Member views were to be provided in advance of officers preparing the annual LIP report which was normally presented to the Committee at its November meeting.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

(1)  the Committee’s Work Programme at Appendix 1 to Report ES13025 be agreed;

 

(2)  progress related to previous Committee requests as set out at Appendix 2 to Report ES13025 be noted; and

 

(3)  the Environment Portfolio contracts listed at Appendix 3 to Report ES13025 be noted. 

 

Appendix A

QUESTIONS TO THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FROM MR COLIN WILLETTS FOR WRITTEN REPLY ON 5TH MARCH 2013

 

1. With regard to the steep grass banking outside nos 79 - 97 Leesons Hill, nos 147- 173 Leesons Hill and 282 - 304 Chipperfield Road, could the Portfolio Holder tell us i) if the Health and Safety issues have been resolved to allow all the grass banking (top to bottom) to be cut?, ii) if these issues have not been resolved could he tell us when they will be?

 

Reply

 

(i)  The Landscape Group and LBB are currently jointly reviewing the health and safety control measures.

(ii)  These issues should be resolved following a review of the health and safety control measures. This may result in an adjusted maintenance regime from April 2013 and subsequent seasons.

 

--------------------

 

2.  Having been informed by Councillor Ince at our LCRA meeting 4/2/13 that a CCTV camera had been installed overlooking Cotmandene Crescent car park it transpired via a later email that this was 'promised' rather than 'installed'. Could the Portfolio Holder tell us when this 'promise' will be fulfilled with an approximate date for installation to counter the ongoing fly tipping problem at this location?

 

Reply

 

The contract was put out to tender immediately after the Portfolio Holder gave the go ahead for the scheme, the tenders have been evaluated and the contract awarded. 

There is a six week lead in on having the cameras built and the installation will be started as soon as the cameras are received, shortly thereafter. It is anticipated that all of the works should be completed and the system commissioned at the beginning of April.

 

--------------------

 

3.  Could the Portfolio Holder tell us if the  flank fences forming the boundarIies adjoining the public footpaths adjacent at  i) 50 Curtismill Way & ii) 52 Curtismill Way & iii) 43 Broomwood & iv) 45 Broomwood Road are the responsibility of the London Borough of Bromley?

 

Reply

 

Flank fences that form the boundary to a public footpath would be considered the responsibility of the adjoining owner of the premises. Investigations regarding land ownership of these locations have been made with the Land Registry Office.

 

--------------------

 

QUESTIONS TO THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FROM MR COLIN WILLETTS FOR WRITTEN REPLY ON 16TH APRIL 2013

 

1.  Could the Portfolio Holder have the 96% (overall total estimate) of unumbered lamp columns in Saxville Road, Pleasance Road, Kelsey Road, Normanhurst Road & Dawson Avenue marked up for indentifcation?

 

Reply

 

In view of the lamps’ original ID tags having either been stolen or vandalised, numbers will now be stencilled on to the columns for identification purposes.

 

--------------------

 

2.  Could the Portfolio Holder assist in cordoning off a missing section of metal railings (leading to a 20 foot drop on to concrete hard standing) 60 yards in, on the left hand side, in LBB road adjacent 1 Whippendell Way, reported as urgent 7/4/13 and further reported to me by Mr Stephen Brown 281 Chipperfield Road on Tuesday evening 7pm 9/4/13 as still a hazard.

 

Reply

 

Yes.

 

--------------------

 

3.  Having been asked directions to Orpington Library on several occasions (including today 10/4/13 outside of WH Smith), could the Portfolio Holder consider installing Library sign/s at the north/south side entrances to the Walnuts lead from Orpington High Street?

 

Reply

 

I have referred your question on to Mr Marc Hume, Director for Renewal & Recreation who holds responsibility for libraries to determine whether he believes, or might have previously heard concerns expressed that such signage is necessary.

 

I will write to you in due course when I have heard back from him.

 

--------------------