Environment and Transport Select Committee

24. MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 27 August 2004 was confirmed.

25. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Mr A J Mundy declared a personal interest in any matter relating to environmental issues as his son was an Environmental Engineer.

26. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

A question was submitted by Mr G Sutcliffe in relation to the Newport Traffic Management Scheme.

A copy of the question and reply given is contained in the Public Questions Register. (PQ35/04)

27. FORWARD PLAN

(During consideration of this item Mrs M J Miller declared a personal interest as Chairman of the Council’s Development Control Committee)

The Select Committee was advised of items contained in the Forward Plan, for the period November 2004 to February 2005, which were of relevance to it. The Portfolio Holder for Transport also indicated that it was his intention to report to the Executive by the end of the year on Green Travel Plans so that these could be implemented in January 2005. He advised that an item on an Island Residents Parking Permit would be discussed by the Executive in January 2005.

In the light of information supplied as part of the answer to the public question earlier in the meeting the Select Committee believed that it should be involved in reviewing the Newport Traffic Management Scheme which was to end in May 2005. This would enable the Select Committee to receive evidence from a number of key stakeholders and assist the Portfolio Holder in formulating proposals for consideration by the Executive.

ACTION TO BETAKEN BY THE HEAD OF SELECT COMMITTEE AND BEST VALUE SUPPORT AND HEAD OF ENGINEERING SERVICES

A review of the Newport Traffic Management Scheme be undertaken by the Select Committee prior to May 2005.

28. SERVICE PLANS 2005-06

(During consideration of this item Mrs M J Miller declared a personal interest as Chairman of the Council’s Development Control Committee)

The Select Committee considered details of the top priorities for the Annual Action Statement; contribution towards corporate priorities of e-government, diversity and people management; revenue bids and risk management contained within the Service Plans for Engineering Services and Planning Services in relation to elements for building control and Agenda 21.

It was indicated that arising from further discussions with Government Departments it was unlikely that a PFI for Highways would not be operable until July 2007. Additionally the timescale for the Local Transport Plan would mean that it would have to be discussed by the Select Committee by March 2005 to enable it to be submitted to the Government by the target date of 29 July 2005. There would be a need for the Council to compile an inventory of all its highway assets irrespective of whether a PFI was successful. Advice was also being sought from other Authorities on staffing required to undertake all the necessary work associated with a PFI application. Some concern was expressed by members as to the ability of the Council to be able to achieve a PFI for both highways and school buildings within the same time frame.

The Select Committee was made aware of progress with the process for the detailed design for the Ryde Transport Interchange. The grant for this scheme was ring fenced and set at £5.6m. It was noted that between 5% - 10% of any engineering scheme would be required for design work. The consultants brief did not however preclude the ability to attract commercial involvement in the scheme.

In debating the revenue bids members were reminded by the Portfolio Holder that the Council did not have a statutory duty to operate a concessionary fare scheme. The existing budget was proving to be insufficient following its extension to include men aged between 60 and 65. Clarification was given on the breakdown of the £250,000 bid for staffing. This included the requirement for an inspector for safety and bridge inspections, waste management contract monitoring officer and principal design engineer and an engineering technician. Members were advised of further changes that were being made to the structure of the Highway’s Inspection Team based on experiences gained over the previous year. Reference was made to the comments made the previous year by the Select Committee regarding the use of the spend to save budget. This had not been taken into consideration by the Executive and members again believed that a number of the bids could fall into this category.

With regard to the diversity element of the Engineering Services plan which was more customer focused than others that members had seen.

On risk management members sought clarification of responsibilities when a launch service was provided during those times when the Floating Bridge was being serviced. This was particularly with a view when severe weather conditions were experienced.

Mention was also made of the number of road traffic accidents on the Island. The seriousness of these often required the attendance of a specialist officer from Hampshire Constabulary. Roads had to be closed whilst investigations were carried out and members queried the officer’s availability as there appeared to be a problem following a recent accident at Arreton.

The Select Committee noted that there was no specific mention of Agenda 21 in the Planning Service Plan. The Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development, Environment and Planning Policy indicated that this issue should be Authority wide. Environmental issues were very difficult to measure and a great deal of work was being undertaken and there was need to ensure that this received more recognition. A query was however raised in respect of any financial savings that would occur as the result of the Planning Section implementing DIPS.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE HEAD OF ENGINEERING SERVICES

(a) Clarification be sought on the responsibilities associated with the risk assessment required for the operation of the replacement boat service, when Cowes Floating Bridge is out of operation, with particular emphasis on weather conditions.

(b) Details on the availability of Hampshire Constabulary’s major traffic accident investigation officer on the Island be obtained.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR TRANSPORT AND HEAD OF ENGINEERING SERVICES

The revenue bids be considered within the context of spend to save as supported by the Select Committee last year.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING POLICY AND AGENDA 21 OFFICER

(a) A report be submitted to a future meeting of the Select Committee on Agenda 21 to enable it to monitor progress made during the past 12 months.

(b) Clarification be given as to savings that were predicted as the result of implementing DIPS for Development Control.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE HEAD OF SELECT COMMITTEE AND BEST VALUE SUPPORT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

A report be submitted to the Co-ordinating Committee on the financial consequences for the Authority of entering into a number of PFI’s simultaneously.

29. ISLAND RESIDENTS PERMIT FOR CAR PARKS

The Select Committee considered an item requested by Cllr Cunningham, under Select Committee Procedure Rule 9, relating to progress being made with an Island Residents Permit for car parks. He indicated that in a report to the Executive on 17 June 2004 the Portfolio Holder for Transport had stated that the results of investigations into the introduction of an Island Residents Permit would be reported to the Quality Transport partnership, Select Committee and Executive in September/October. No reference to this matter had been shown in the Forward Plan concerning car parking. There also appeared to be confusion over the validity of permits that had recently been issued for those car parks where charges had recently been introduced.

The Portfolio Holder outlined the background to the decisions taken in response to residents comments arising from the introduction of charges at Carisbrooke, Wootton and Seaview. Unfortunately there was some confusion with the conditions under which permits were originally issued to residents.

The Select Committee was advised that the Portfolio Holder was not yet in a position to report on the progress made with an Island Residents permit which would be capable of being used in the majority of Council car parks. The cost of such a permit would be in the region of £100. It was likely that a report would be submitted to the Executive in January 2005 and implemented with effect from 1 April 2005.

Members discussed the need to ensure a simplified and consistent policy towards the issue and validity of permits. Concern was expressed as to the effect that charging for car parking was having on the use of the Council’s Leisure Centres. The Portfolio Holder for Transport indicated that he was in discussion with the Portfolio Holder for Tourism and Leisure Services on this matter.

The Select Committee considered that there was an urgent need to review the processes by which the permits were issued and amendments made to the Parking Places Order. When this had been completed all those issued with permits should be advised of the outcome.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES

An investigation be undertaken with the Portfolio Holder for Transport, Head of Engineering Services and the local members for Wootton, Carisbrooke and Seaview on the decision making process with regard to the issue of residents permits at these car parks, a solution to the misunderstandings relating to the validity of the newly issued permits and effect on other permit holders.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR TRANSPORT

The Select Committee supports the Portfolio Holder in developing an All Island Residents Permit as a matter of urgency and this should be implemented by April 2005.

30. TRADING AND CHARGING

The Select Committee debated the report of the Chief Financial Officer and Head of Legal and Democratic Services which gave an overview of new statutory provisions on trading and charging. Members were told that with charging the Council could only pass on costs to the service user. With trading however the Authority could provide a commercial service, and could make a profit, but this had to be achieved through a company.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services outlined the criteria that could be used as the basis for identifying opportunities for charging and trading. This was not only of relevance to the services coming within the remit of the Select Committee but was a corporate issue. Members believed that the ability to engage with partners in establishing any form of trading company should not be overlooked.

It was noted that a survey was currently nearing completion by the Local Government Association on approaches being taken by other authorities and the Hampshire and IOW Chief Financial Officers had also undertaken a similar exercise.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR TRANSPORT AND HEAD OF ENGINEERING SERVICES

(a) A report be submitted to the Select Committee on opportunities afforded by the new statutory provisions relating to charging.

(b) The new statutory provisions on trading and charging be taken into account In developing the Highways PFI proposals.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY THE RESOURCES SELECT COMMITTEE

Consideration be given to a corporate approach to the new trading and charging powers and the compilation of a spend to save bid to progress any relevant business case.

31. MEMBERS’ QUESTION TIME

Mr R C Richards asked questions relating to the disposal of fluorescent lighting tubes and long life light bulbs. The Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development, Environment and Planning Policy indicated that she would clarify the policy on this.

Mr R A Sutton asked questions of the Chairman in relation to the car parking order, congestion charging and timed meetings. The Chairman indicated that as no advance notice had been given of the questions he would reply outside the meeting.

CHAIRMAN