Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor Simon Fawthrop declared an interest as he had shares in BT, but he said they were below the threshold that would normally be declared as a pecuniary interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 21st of March 2022 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

Questions from Councillors and the public for written response were disseminated at the meeting and will be attached as an appendix to the minutes when they are published.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions that are not specific to reports on the agenda must have been received in writing 10 working days before the date of the meeting. Please ensure therefore, that questions that are not specific to the agenda are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on 7^th June

Questions specifically relating to reports on the agenda should be received within two working days of the normal publication date of the agenda.  Please ensure that questions specifically on reports on the agenda are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on 15^th June.

The Chairman and the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety received questions for oral response. The questions and responses will be attached as an appendix to the minutes.

A question for oral response was responded to by the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety. The question and response will be attached as an appendix to the minutes.

CSD22076

It was noted that the Chairman had asked Councillor Thomas Turrell to provide an update to the Committee at the meeting on 22^nd November 2022 with respect to his role as Executive Assistant to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces.

RESOLVED that the Matters Arising report and Work Programme be noted and that Councillor Thomas Turrell provide an update to the Committee on 22^nd November 2022 with respect to his role as Executive Assistant to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces.

Attending to provide the update on the Arboriculture-Glendale-Annual Contract Performance Monitoring Report were Hugh Chapman, (LBB Arboricultural Services Manager) and Nick Brooks from Glendale. It was noted that this annual report outlined the performance of the contract which delivered the day to day arboricultural operations across the Council's administrative area relating to the financial year 2021 to 2022.

The Chairman expressed his thanks to Mr. Brooks for the sterling work undertaken by Glendale during storm ‘Eunice’. He asked Mr. Brooks how he felt Glendale had been performing this year.  Mr. Brooks referred to the KPI’s and the response against the KPI’s as listed in the report and expressed the view that overall Glendale had performed well. The Chairman asked Mr. Brooks what he felt Glendale could improve upon in terms of their services to the Council. Mr. Brooks responded and said that the contract had grown since its inception and that what he would like to improve upon was the level of  resource in terms of people. Despite the offering of good salaries, it was difficult to recruit people into the arboricultural industry and this seemed to be a national problem.

A Member asked Mr. Brooks how the Council could be confident that they would not fall behind again and would cope well in the future. Mr. Brooks responded and said that storm Eunice was a significant event which had involved responding to approximately 400 call outs. Their strategy team had to bring in additional contractors to provide support. In terms of resources, the company was looking to set up an internal academy to bring through and educate their own trainees and some of these new trainees had been taken on already. It was explained that the trainees could start basic work in 3-6 months, but it would take 1-2 years to become fully qualified.

The LBB Arboricultural Services Manager stated that Glendale had been asked to provide a corrective action plan together with a timeframe for the resolution of outstanding issues. Weekly performance against targets was now being monitored. LBB were waiting for Glendale to submit a revised timeframe. 

A Member asked if the businesses that had been used to help to provide support and backlog recovery were local businesses. Mr Brooks responded that 2/3 of the businesses were locally based. It was difficult to allocate work out to smaller businesses as they would get overloaded and struggle to cope quite quickly. 

A Member asked what was being done to reduce the transmission of Ash Dieback disease. The LBB Arboricultural Services Manager responded and said that there was no cure for this disease; in terms of prevention the main preventative measure was the clearing away of leaf debris. If more than 50% of the tree was dead or dying then it would be removed. The Chairman asked if the service was keeping an eye on other tree diseases. The Arboricultural Services Manager said that he and his officers undertook continued professional development and kept up to date with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 185.

The Head of Performance Management & Business Support attended to brief the Committee regarding the ECS Performance Overview report.

It was noted that the number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents had increased and this was disappointing. The Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking stated that this was a trend that was the same for neighbouring boroughs. The department would be looking at the trends and doing what it could to reduce the number of KSIs. A Member asked if these figures could be broken down so that Members could differentiate between those who were injured and those who were killed. She asked if this data could be provided for future reports. The Assistant Director for Traffic and parking said that the data was available and that he would disseminate it.

A Member commented that it was not good enough just to say that other boroughs had seen similar increases, she stated that what was required was not a reactive response but that the Council should be more proactive in taking measures to reduce KSIs. She felt the current KSI figures were unacceptable. She also asked if a breakdown of the figures could be provided for each Ward. The Assistant Director responded and said that this data could be extrapolated and sent out. He also said that the Council already identified dangerous roads and where accidents were happening. He said the Council did not have the resources to make every road safe, but they used data to try and identify if there was a pattern of accidents and hotspots. The Council would then prioritise these areas. It was also important to identify the age groups involved.

A Member stated that a 26.7% increase over target was not a slight increase but was a significant one, she also pointed out that a serious injury could be life changing or could in fact be fatal after 30 days. The Assistant Director responded and said that 99.9% of deaths would occur within the 30 day period. The Council would be informed by the police concerning this. He said that every fatality was fully investigated. A Member said that she objected to the use of the term ‘accident’ in these instances because careless driving was not an accident.

A Member stated that she had undertaken a survey with local residents before the recent elections and found out that a big concern was road safety. She expressed the view that smaller accidents were not being recorded on the Council’s KSI database.

A Member pointed out that Bromley had more miles of road than any other borough in London. 

RESOLVED that the report be noted and that in future, KSI data would be broken down by Ward and would also show the number of people killed and the number of people seriously injured. 

An update was provided from the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety. He said that he had met with the previous Portfolio Holder recently and found this meeting very helpful. By way of introduction he said that he had been working for the Council for 16 years and had previously worked as the Parliamentary Private Secretary for the Department of Transport. He said that he was a cyclist, a pedestrian, held a motorcycle licence and used all forms of transport. He said that he had much reading to do and recommended that everyone read the Local Implementation Plan--although it was a large document he described it as ‘readable’.

The Portfolio Holder commented that at the moment there was no TfL funding available and LBB was waiting for a new tranche of funding to be released. He mentioned that the Government wanted to see improvements in the way that TFL functioned and that they particularly wanted to see three underground lines automated in the near future. He expressed the view that a longer term funding agreement with TfL was required. The Council had requested £2m and currently had been allocated £100,000 which had been earmarked for various projects.

The Portfolio Holder recommended travelling on the new ‘Elizabeth Line’ which had increased the underground network capacity by 10%. The Portfolio Holder mentioned that he wanted to visit every ward to gain a comprehensive understanding of any issues and problems that existed in each ward. He also said that he wanted to produce a policy document which would set down clear guidelines on policies and the future direction of the Portfolio.

RESOLVED that the update from the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety be noted. 

An update was received from the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces. The Portfolio Holder explained that she had been a Councillor for four years and represented the Shortlands and Park Langley Ward. She was excited about the step up to Cabinet. She explained that her first real political experience was when she was 18. She had campaigned to change a four acre forest into a public park that could be enjoyed by everyone.

She had a background in social housing where she had been involved in developing the organisation’s decarbonizing policy. She had also worked for a company that was involved in training and providing a knowledge base for gold miners to help them use environmentally safe products for gold mining. The Portfolio Holder was now in the process of setting up key meetings with various stakeholders including a meeting shortly with the Friends Group. She was also involved in developing the Jubilee Criteria and was happy to hear from any Ward Members concerning any issues in their wards that were related to her Portfolio.

RESOLVED that the update from the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces be noted.

Portfolio Holder decisions for pre-decision scrutiny.

CSD 21143

The Committee noted the report regarding the proposed appointments to the Countryside Consultative Panel and the Leisure Gardens and Allotments Panel.

RESOLVED that the proposed appointments to the Countryside Consultative Panel and the Leisure Gardens and Allotments Panel be agreed.

ES20175

The Committee noted the report regarding the Contaminated Land Strategy for 2022.

RESOLVED that:

1) The Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces authorised the Head of Domestic Regulation to commence a consultation with relevant bodies on the updated draft Contaminated Land Strategy that was attached as appendix 1 to the main report.

2) The Committee agreed that a further report be received following the conclusion of consultation, when the Committee will be asked to approve the adoption of the Draft Contaminated Land Strategy 2022, incorporating any relevant amendments following the consultation.

FSD22051

Members noted the Capital Programme Monitoring Report for Quarter 4 2021 to 2022.

RESOLVED that:

The Portfolio Holders noted and acknowledged the current position in respect of capital schemes, to be put to the Executive on the 30th of June 2022.

FSD 22050

The Committee noted the provisional outturn position with respect to 2021/22.

RESOLVED that:

The Portfolio Holders endorsed the 2021/22 outturn position for the Environment & Community Services Portfolio.

ES20191

The Committee noted the report regarding the Online Environmental Reporting System Contract which was presented by the LBB Technical Support and Marketing Manager. He provided further clarification regarding the data provided in section 3.18 of the report. A Member commented that there were no doubt ‘hotspots’ where issues were reported regularly on FIX My Street. She asked if this data was monitored so that remedial action could be taken. It was explained that there was a ‘heat map’ system that was part of the software that provided this data. This data was fed back to officers who would take relevant action in response.

A Member raised the issue of ward boundaries on Fix My Street, as the ward boundaries on Fix My Street at the time of the meeting were still aligned with the old ward boundaries which had now changed. The LBB Technical Support and Marketing Manager explained that there had been a delay in re-aligning the new ward boundaries as LBB had been waiting for the Ordinance Survey master map to be released. In the interim the LBB Technical Support and Marketing Manager was investigating ways to use other maps on a temporary basis.

A Member raised the issue of people being able to report issues if they did not have digital access. The LBB Technical Support and Marketing Manager said that in such cases, people could call the Council Call Centre and they would log the issue for them.

A Member asked if the original text of the reported issue could be incorporated into the response when the issue was being closed as being actioned. The LBB Technical Support and Marketing Manager said that this was something that could be looked into but there were no immediate plans to provide this service.

RESOLVED that:

The Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services & Open Spaces approved the direct award, via exemption to competitive tendering, of a new online environmental reporting system contract to SocietyWorks Ltd for FixMyStreet Pro & WasteWorks at an annual cost of £54k (£30k for FMS Pro & £24k for WasteWorks) commencing 1 April 2023 for eight years with an option to extend for two further years (estimated whole life value of £540k).

:

ES20192  

The Review of the School Streets Report was presented by the Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking, along with the Road Safety Manager.

A Member stated that she had liaised with colleagues in other boroughs and found that the common denominator in terms of the successful implementation of School Streets was the use of ANPR cameras. She expressed the view that a reliance on Street Marshals was misplaced. She felt that the financial arguments outlined in the report were unacceptable and asked for the recommendations to be refused. 

Another Member agreed with this view and asked that the recommendations of the report be rejected. She said that she had taken the time to observe the School Street operating in Hayes at 8.00am. Her experience of the School Street was not as outlined in the report. She said that she saw hundreds of children, walking, scooting and cycling to school in a calm and relaxed atmosphere. Many families were enjoying the School Street. The Member had taken photographs and had drafted a report. In her report she had recommended the use of Traffic Enforcement Officers. She explained that the main problem that they had at the barrier (manned by one steward) was with delivery drivers and builders. The Member continued and pointed out that the Ward Councillor (Cllr Thomas Turrell) took a positive view of the School Street. She suggested that LBB could look to adopt the model used in Birmingham where they used mobile ANPR cameras. Another possibility (also used in Birmingham), was the use of body cameras by stewards. The Member stated that there were many positives about the scheme and many teething problems that could be fixed.

A Member asked that as the Council was earning approximately £3m from the moving traffic contravention cameras, could not some of this money be spent on School Streets.

The Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking responded and pointed out that the report was not saying that the Council was not going to be involved in any School Street projects. He said that the recommendation of the report was that the Council would support schools that wanted to run School Streets. However, the Council was not looking to roll out School Streets everywhere because of the resource implications. He stated that the School Streets project in Hayes was initially a pilot and that other schemes had been piloted during lockdown. Some were successful and others were not.

The Assistant Director pointed out that the use of CCTV and mobile cameras was very expensive and even if the Council had the cameras, it was expensive to move them around. The Assistant Director explained that at the moment the Council did not have any mobile cameras in the borough and to purchase any would involve the Council in significant cost. There was also the additional cost involved in the running of the cameras. At the end of the day, it was a matter of the prioritisation of resources and budgets. There were numerous  ...  view the full minutes text for item 189f

ES20189

The Strategic Commissioning Officer attended to provide the update on the One Million Pounds Platinum Jubilee Parks Fund along with the Environment Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces. The proposals had been promoted to Councillors, community activist groups and stakeholders. It was hoped that many bids could be submitted in the first tranche of funding applications. Funding was more likely to be provided for projects that were community led and supported by the community. The Portfolio Holder said that she was keen to promote projects that supported loneliness and community cohesion.

The report was presented to the Committee to outline the proposed rules of engagement for applications to the Platinum Jubilee Parks Fund, and to seek Environment Portfolio Holder approval for its adoption.

A Member referred to criteria 13 with respect to making funding applications. This criteria stated that for applications in excess of £3k, 100 signatures would be required from people on the electoral roll. It was suggested by a Member that this would be undemocratic because it would exclude anyone under the voting age that may wish to sign something that they believed in. The Portfolio Holder responded and said if anyone felt that they would like to comment in objection or support, they were very welcome to do so.

A Member suggested that projects concerning accessibility areas should be considered for funding as well as the provision of water fountains, cycle routes and public toilets. The Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking commented that funds were limited and the provision of toilets was expensive. A Member said that a meeting had recently taken place with the Friends Group with respect to Priory Park. They had taken note of what needed to be done, this was now being costed and the project was going ahead; it was suggested that a press release accompany this initiative. It was also suggested that this initiative should be promoted to all Friends Groups and it was noted that the application form would appear on the Council website at some point in July. The Portfolio Holder said that it was necessary for projects involving parks to be led by the Friends Groups first, as they were the custodians of the parks.

RESOLVED that:

1) The ECS PDS Committee noted the proposed rules of engagement to allocate funding for each round of the Platinum Jubilee Parks Fund as set out in Appendix A of this report. 

2) The Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces approved the proposed rules of engagement for decision making on requests for funding from the Platinum Jubilee Parks Earmarked Reserve, based on the parameters and criteria set out in Appendix A to the report.

. 

HPR2022/022

The report was presented by the LBB Head of Regeneration.

The report provided an update on the Regeneration Plan for Crystal Palace Park and set out the next steps to take forward the capital scheme. It made recommendations in relation to securing the legal agreements to dispose of the residential sites as part of the Housing Enabling Development, securing funding for the first phases of works, as well as transferring the Park to the Crystal Palace Park Trust.

It was noted that the report had already been scrutinised by two other committees and that it was going to the Executive Committee to make the final decision.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

. 

ES20184

Members noted the ECS Contracts Register Report.

RESOLVED that the ECS Contracts Register  be noted.

ES20178

A Member raised the issue of the Waldo Road Depot improvement works. She asked if there was a plan that could be shared.  She wondered why the original plan had been delayed and how long the depot would be closed. The Member expressed concern about the possible impacts on waste disposal and recycling. She asked that some detail be provided to her regarding this.

The Director for Environment and Public Protection responded and said that  this was a project for significant improvement works at the Waldo Road Depot;  it was a £6.4m capital programme project. More detail would be provided to Members in the future when a new and final report would be presented to the Committee, when permission would be sought to appoint a contractor for the improvement works. The current economic climate was having a negative impact on large scale capital projects nationwide as costs were increasing and supply chains were being affected. Detailed design work would be undertaken by officers and then a new report would be brought back to Members to seek to procure the new contract. The Director promised to provide copies of the previous report regarding Waldo Road to any Members that required it.

The Director stated that Veolia had strong views on how the works should be completed and discussions with Veolia were ongoing.  A discussion took place concerning the possible impact of the delay in progressing the Waldo Road capital improvement works and also how the Council could improve the recycling of paper that had got wet. 

A Member noted that on this occasion, the opportunity had not been provided to scrutinise the Portfolio Holders and she requested that this be addressed going forward. She raised the matter of how LBB measured air quality. She asked that either a report come back to the Committee regarding this or if a PowerPoint presentation could be disseminated to Members. A Member commented that a report had been undertaken by Imperial College regarding air quality and this had been based on extrapolated data from a monitor by the Glade. He believed that another 10 monitors existed in the borough. He agreed that more information should be provided to Members regarding this and the Chairman suggested that an update on this be brought to the September meeting. A Member informed the Committee that the PRUH had a live air quality monitor and that DPD monitored air quality via their delivery vans.

RESOLVED that

1) The ECS Risk Register is noted

2) The previous Waldo Road Improvement Works report be disseminated as required.

(Post meeting note: this was disseminated on 11^th July 2022)

3) An updated Waldo Road report would be brought to Members in due course when it was time to appoint a contractor for the capital programme works.

4) An update or report would be brought to the September meeting concerning how LBB monitored air quality. 

Members noted the items listed in the Part 2 (exempt items) Contracts Register Report.

RESOLVED that the Part 2 Contracts Register Report be noted.

HPR2022/022A

The LBB Head of Regeneration attended to update members on the Crystal Palace Park Regeneration Plan. Members noted the report as requested and also noted that the final decision would be made by the Executive.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.