Agenda and minutes

No apologies for absence were received.

There were no declarations of interest.

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

The minutes of the meeting that was held on 15^th July to discuss the call in of the School Street Decision were also agreed.

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 22^nd August.

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 31^st August.

No questions were received for the attention of the Chairman.

Questions for a response from the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety are attached as an appendix to the minutes.

Questions for a response from the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces were received. The questions and responses are attached as an appendix to the minutes.

CSD21145

It was noted that an update from Councillor Thomas Turrell (Executive Assistant to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces) be added to the Work Programme for the November meeting.

It was noted that the following reports would be brought to the November meeting:

·  Kelsey Park Bridges

·  Policy Paper on Parking Fees and Charges

·  TFL Funding Position

·  Review of the first year of the Parks and Open Spaces Strategy.

·  Grass Verges

The report regarding Goddington Park would be withdrawn.

A Member asked when Riney would be reporting to the Committee. It was likely that this would take place in January 2023.

RESOLVED that the Work Programme be noted and that the updates mentioned above be implemented.

The Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety provided a written update for Members. 

A Member referred to the last sentence in the Portfolio Holder’s briefing: ‘In the meantime, unfortunately much needed improvements to assist road safety remain on hold’. (This was in relation to the fact that LBB were waiting to see what grant funding would be made available by TFL). The Member asked if this meant that road safety improvements had currently ground to a halt. The Portfolio Holder responded and said that current funding had been allocated to various areas of research. He referred to a document that he had tabled from London Councils regarding this. He mentioned that he was aware of a recent meeting with Technical Officers who may be able to assist with a revised update.

A Member referenced the high number of road casualties which continued in the Penge and Cator Ward. This problem had persisted for the last four years despite the use of LIP money to reconfigure problematic junctions in the High Street. She wondered if it would be possible to look a bit deeper at the reasons why these accidents were still occurring. The Member invited the Portfolio Holder to come on a walkabout of the Penge and Cator Ward and the invitation was accepted. The Portfolio Holder suggested that the Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking disseminate to the Member a collision map for that area. It was noted that in some cases accidents were simply the result of driver error.

RESOLVED that:

1) The update from the Portfolio Holder be noted.

2) The Member for Penge and Cator be provided with a ‘collision map’ for the ward.

3) The Portfolio Holder would undertake a walkabout of the Penge and Cator Ward.

Members noted the statement that had been tabled by the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces.

A Member asked if issues surrounding the planting of flower beds would be able to be discussed by the Committee at a later date. The Portfolio Holder responded and said that she had asked officers to look into this and it may be possible to address these issues in the Grass Verges Report.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder update be noted.

At the request of Members there will be an A3 Excel Data sheet put inside the agenda pack.

A discussion took place concerning item 3H which was the performance of the arboricultural contract managed by Glendale. It was noted that discussions were being held weekly with Glendale using the Council’s performance management framework tool in an attempt to incentivise commitment by the contractor to hitting the relevant targets.

A Member expressed disappointment that road casualty data had begun to rise and she expressed the view that the Council was not making sufficient progress with reducing road casualties. She felt that the Council should have a stronger commitment to reducing road casualties and should make a public statement to that effect.

The Assistant Director for Traffic and Parking was disappointed that the road casualty data had increased and he hoped that it was just a temporary blip. He explained that the Council did target areas where more serious injuries were occurring. The Council was aware of the data which indicated that vulnerable road users were most at risk and developed interventions to try and help this demographic as much as possible.

The Council also implemented a Casualty Reduction Scheme. Everything of course was limited by budgetary constraints. He said that the overall trend over the last ten years was downward and that the Council would continue to take action as required to reduce KSIs. A Member asked if it would be prudent to change the schemes that the Council was using. The Assistant Director  responded and said it was unlikely that a better way could be found. The Council looked through accident cluster sites and tried its best to engineer out problems if possible. There were currently about 80/90 junction sites that matched the criteria for investigations and so the Council would not be in a position to intervene in every case. The Council would try and balance out how to prevent the most accidents with its finite financial resources.

RESOLVED that the ECS Performance Overview be noted.

The Veolia Annual Contract Performance Report update was provided by the LBB Head of Environmental Strategy, Technical Support and Commissioning. Attending representing Veolia was Ben Velman (Regional Manager: Municipal South East). Members were asked to review the report and comment on Veolia's performance.

The LBB Head of Environmental Strategy, Technical Support and Commissioning stated that the report was focused on three main areas which were:

·  Waste Disposal

·  Waste Collection

·  Street Environment

She was pleased to report that despite difficulties, performance had remained on track. A number of projects had been delivered throughout the year and these were summarised in the report.

The Chairman was impressed by the report and by Veolia’s performance. Mr Velmans clarified that two reports had been presented by Veolia, one was specific to Bromley and the other was a generic corporate sustainability report, which was available on Veolia’s website. Mr Velmans mentioned that Veolia had experienced difficulties because of problems in the labour market caused by Covid 19 and the national shortage of HGV drivers.

A Member pointed out that the table in the report regarding residents’ satisfaction had been conducted at recycling depots and it was only to be expected that surveys of this nature would result in high levels of reported satisfaction. The Member stated that she received hundreds of complaints from households concerning refuse and debris that had been strewn along people’s pathways and roads after collections. She expressed the view that if surveys were conducted directly with households, then the results of the surveys would be far less positive.

Mr Velmans responded and said there were two separate surveys mentioned in the report. One survey reported on visitors’ experience of waste services at recycling sites and the other survey reported on customer satisfaction across all street environment areas which had improved by approximately 1%. He stated that the overall trend was improving and that the street environment surveys were conducted by independent survey companies. The Member responded and said that in her Ward, officers and the Neighbourhood Environmental Team were left to clean up after the mess left by Veolia operatives and so she expressed the view that a household waste service survey was required. The LBB Head of Environmental Strategy, Technical Support and Commissioning said that surveys always had limitations, and that the Council also monitors enquiries and feedback from residents daily, and last month was the first time that more compliments than complaints for the waste service had been received.  

A Member raised the issue of a road in her ward that extended into Lewisham. She said that issues had been reported with the refuse collection failing to extend to the end of the road. She also supported a residential survey and requested that she be able to speak to someone privately about this matter post meeting. The LBB Head of Environmental Strategy, Technical Support and Commissioning said that colleagues in Neighbourhood Management would make contact about specific service queries.

A discussion took place concerning the respective recycling rates  ...  view the full minutes text for item 212.

Portfolio Holder decisions for pre-decision scrutiny.

ES20200

A Member stated that it would be critical to involve local residents. They were excited, wanted to be involved and possessed a very detailed knowledge of the area. She made the request that any areas of woodland that were established should be open, accessible and not fenced off.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces approve the proceeding to stage 2 of the Woodlands Creation Planning Grant and endorse a Woodland Establishment Appraisal for the following sites:

·  Edgebury Grazing Lands, Slades Drive, Chislehurst, BR7 6JY

·  Kemnal Road, Imperial Way, Chislehurst, BR7 6JR

·  World's End Lane, BR6 6AW

FSD22062

A Member asked if the budget would still be balanced in view of the anticipated increases in energy costs. The Director for Environment and Public Protection responded that it was not possible to guarantee the costs of energy contracts going forward. Councillor Fawthrop declared an interest and said that in his ward the residents were keen to have the street lights turned off to reduce light pollution. He asked if any trials of this were being considered as it may result in savings to the Council. The Portfolio Holder responded and said this was something that the Germans were looking at, but it was difficult politically and socially. It was noted that the Assistant Director for Highways had previously commented that dimming the LED street lights did not actually result in any significant savings.

Councillor Fawthrop stated that he was not referring to the dimming of lights but to actually having lights switched off, saying that a report had previously been published indicating that crime fell when lights were turned off. A Member responded that as the mother of a young daughter she would not be keen on lights being switched off.

A Member asked if there were still any problems with the electrical supply to market stalls and she referred to a section of the report concerning  traffic and road safety where there was a reference to TfL funding and a mention of ‘full service redesign’. She enquired as to what ‘full service redesign’ actually meant. 

The Director for Environment and Public Protection informed the Committee that up until the day before the meeting the issue of TfL funding was problematic and that some posts that were normally funded by TfL had been covered by the Council's budget. However, news had subsequently been received which seemed to shed a more promising light on the provision of future TfL funding. The situation was now looking more promising and indeed the Council would likely be in a position to recoup money that it had already spent to cover the funding of staff that was normally paid for by TfL.

With respect to market stalls, it had previously been the case that the Council  generated a reasonable amount of income from the sale of market stall licences. However, in an effort to stimulate the economy post Covid, the Government had introduced new legislation which meant that the Council could now only levy a flat charge of £100 per licence, which had reduced the level of income that the Council could generate from the sale of market stall licences.

The power boxes that supplied electrical power to the market stalls had to be maintained and fixed on a regular basis. Sometimes this was because they were not used correctly by the market stall holders; sometimes there was general wear and tear on the units and sometimes they were vandalised. However the Director was not aware of any particular problems outside of the ordinary.

Members noted that there had been less contravention  ...  view the full minutes text for item 213b

FSD21049

A discussion took place about the Council's Gritters and its ability to properly grit during the winter period. The Director for Environment and Public Protection assured that the Council would be ready to grit and that the gritters were regularly serviced and maintained.

A Member referenced the Betts Park Canal Bank Stabilisation Project and the estimated figure in the budget of £8k. She asked if these works were being undertaken this year. The Director for Environment and Public Protection responded that his understanding was that engineering work had been undertaken to stabilise the banks of the canal and that this work had been completed. He therefore  suspected that the £8k was probably the underspend left over from the project, but this was something that he would need to check on.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety and the Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces note and acknowledge the changes to the Capital Programme that would be presented to the Executive on the 21st of September 2022.

ES20207

Councillor Fawthrop declared an interest as an electric car driver but stated that his car was not a Tesla. It was explained that Tesla had approached the Council via the Council's Parking Contractor Apcoa. Tesla had offered to pay for the costs for infrastructure work for the installation of electric vehicle charging points in the Civic Centre Car Park. The cost of the installation was £220k and this seemed an offer that was too good to refuse. Within the first six months the EV charging points would be used by Tesla vehicles only, but after that the charging points would be opened up to all other electric vehicles. A Member wondered if Tesla were looking for an exclusivity deal but the Committee was assured that this was not the case. 

RESOLVED that:

1) The Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety agree to enter into a 10 year lease agreement with Tesla to install electrical vehicle charging bays in the civic offices car park.

2) The Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety agree to delegate authority to the Director of Environment and Public Protection, in consultation with the Transport, Highways and Road Safety Portfolio Holder, to agree and settle the commercial terms of the disposal at 2.1 and to enter into all relevant legal agreements and any other ancillary legal documentation related thereto. 

3) The Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety should authorise the Assistant Director for Legal Services, to sign and execute the new EV Charge leases and all relevant legal agreements and any other ancillary legal document documentation relating thereto.

ES20201

This was a report that had been presented to the Committee in order for Members to review and report back to the Executive if required. No questions were received from Members.

RESOLVED that the recommendations to the Executive be agreed.   

The Chairman mentioned that he was planning to form a working group to define the Council’s policy with respect to grass verges. The recommendations of the working group would later be presented to the ECS PDS Committee for consideration. There would be seven members of the working group, four would be from the current Conservative Administration and three would be from the opposition parties.    

ES20209

A discussion took place regarding the costs of the Tree Establishment Programme. A Member commented that the failure to use QR codes with respect to each tree was a missed opportunity. She further commented that some of the planters in the High Street had not been deep enough for plants to thrive and so had died. The Director responded that these trees had been planted previously as part of a regeneration scheme and not all of the trees had succumbed, which was good especially considering the harsh summer that the country had just experienced. It was the case that a replanting programme had now been agreed with colleagues in the Regeneration Department.

A discussion took place regarding the QR codes. It was noted that contractors had been using QR codes to source information concerning the trees, such as when they were last watered. It was anticipated that going forward, (technology permitting) the ability to scan trees with QR codes would be extended to members of the public.

A discussion took place with respect to interactive tree maps. The Portfolio Holder thanked the Tree Team and also local residents who were very keen to support the tree planting programme and water trees when required

A Member drew attention to the fact that eight new trees had been planted in pots in Penge High Street without Councillors being made aware. She commented that six had been stolen in the first week and that squirrels had dugout the earth from the pots and had made a mess. She felt that this was such a waste of resources. It was clarified that the areas concerned were Empire Square and Hartley Square in Penge High Street. It was presumed that people had stolen the trees in order to sell them. The Portfolio Holder said that this particular scheme was not part of the tree planting scheme, but was more likely to be a project that had been initiated by the Regeneration Team. 

A further discussion took place regarding the allocation of contractors for tree servicing and maintenance going forward. The Committee heard that the main time for planting trees was November to March but there was some flexibility regarding this. A Member raised the issue of the problem with utility infrastructure which made tree planting difficult.  He wondered if there was any possible solution to this issue. The Arboricultural Services Manager responded and said this this was indeed a very challenging issue and that it was not possible to relocate utility infrastructure. The Tree Team had to be creative and plant trees where they could.

RESOLVED that the Committee note the progress made in the first year of the Treemendous Tree Establishment Programme. 

ES20208

A discussion took place as to whether or not cycling was permitted in Bromley Parks. It was explained that the current cost estimates that had been received for Kelsey Park replacement bridges was too high and so the Council was exploring the possibility of using different providers to reduce costs; there would be an update provided to the Committee in November.

RESOLVED that:

1) The Committee note the progress made on sourcing replacement structures to the Kelsey Park Bridges.

2) Officers should continue to explore the market for a value for money solution with a further report to follow at the ECS PDS Committee meeting on November 22^nd 2022.

ES20188

Members were pleased to note that nitrogen dioxide levels in the borough were decreasing in line with national guidelines and that four new active monitors had been installed. A Member expressed a desire to extend the amount of nitrogen dioxide reporting alongside an extension of the reporting of pollution from particulate matter. She felt that what was also required was to note particular days and times when pollution levels were high and requested more information going forward about Action Areas. The Environmental Protection and Housing Regulation Manager responded by saying that PM 2.5 was now monitored at five locations which was an increase from zero. She said that currently a full annual range of particulate matter data was not available to report on.

It was explained that there were currently two air quality focus areas which were monitored primarily for historical reasons as previously the pollutant levels in those areas had exceeded a certain threshold. It was noted that those levels were now below the ASR recommendations. The Head of Service for Community Safety, Licencing, Environmental and Domestic regulation explained that what was important was average pollutant readings over a significant period of time.

The Portfolio Holder for Sustainability, Green Services and Open Spaces said that  air quality data from the Borough would be provided to the GLA and to Central Government. Where the data indicated, there would be an extension of Air Quality Action Areas. If there were breaches of pollutant levels in a particular area, then an Air Quality Action Plan would be required to deal with this. It was the case that Air Quality Action Plans and Air Quality Monitoring Areas were not fixed and static, but were fluid and changeable as required.

The Portfolio Holder for Transport, Highways and Road Safety gave a brief update with respect to car idling and informed the Committee that currently there was no official draft sign from the Department of Transport that the Council could use and post on lampposts. There was also some concern that the fine for idling was only £20 and this probably needed to be increased.

The Vice Chairman stated that Bromley's air quality was good. He referenced new targets were released from the World Health Organisation. Now there were four transitional targets before the main target. He stated that Bromley's PM10 target was 0.4 above the final World Health Organisation target which was astounding. He also stated that with respect to PM 2.5, the Council had exceeded the interim targets 1, 2 and 3 and had almost exceeded target 4. He said that the Council was also beating the NO2 WHO target. It was asked if the Council took any measurements with respect to Ozone levels. The Environmental Protection and Housing Regulation Manager said that ozone had been measured historically, but that because now it was not regarded as a pollution concern it was not being measured. It was agreed that the  Environmental Protection and Housing Regulation Manager would write to the Vice Chairman  ...  view the full minutes text for item 218.

At the request of Members, there will be a separate A3 Excel Data sheet that will be added in with the agenda pack.   

ES20202

Members discussed potential risks posed by the disruption to waste services as part of the Waldo Road Depot Improvement Plan. It was noted that this risk would remain in place until the Plan was finalised. The report had been delayed because the Council was still working through various options with Veolia and matters had been further complicated by price increases, inflation and supply chain issues. It was hoped that the report would be able to be presented to the Committee in November. This report would outline the scope of works and proposed mitigation. It was agreed that the report should be added to the November Work Programme.

RESOLVED that the ECS Risk Register report be noted and that the report concerning the Waldo Road Depot Improvement Plan be added to the Work Programme for November.