Agendas, Minutes and Reports

Minutes

of the Meeting of the

Strategic Planning & Economic Development Policy and Scrutiny Panel

Monday 8th January 2007

held at the Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset.

Meeting Commenced: 3.30 p.m. Meeting Concluded: 5.05 p.m.

Present: Councillors Clive Webb (Vice-Chairman – in the Chairman), Bob Bateman, Peter Burden, Mark Canniford, John Clark, Ann Harley (substitute for Elfan Ap Rees), David Shopland and Andy Wright

Apologies for absence: Councillor Elfan Ap Rees

Also in attendance: Councillors John Crockford-Hawley (Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport), Alan Hockridge (Executive Member for Economic Development), Nigel Ashton and Ian Porter

SPE

Public Discussion – Mr Colin Hill
Kewstoke Parish Council (Agenda Item 2)

It was agreed that Mr Hill would address the Panel immediately prior to the Panel’s consideration of the report on Kewstoke Toll Road (SPE 79 refers).

SPE

Declarations of Interest (Agenda Item 3)

Councillor Mark Canniford declared a non-prejudicial interest in Agenda Item 6.2 (Establishment of a Working Group to investigate more cost effective ways of running Playhouse facilities by virtue of operating a business in the vicinity of the Playhouse.

SPE

Draft Revenue and Capital Budgets for 2007/08 (Agenda Item 5.1)

The Panel received this reference from the Executive of 19th December 2006 (EXE 165 refers).

Members acknowledged that the Panel had already considered the Budget in detail at two previous meetings, including comments and recommendations of the Panel’s MTFF/Budget Working Party. The Panel’s recommendations had been referred to the Executive for consideration.

Councillor Burden queried the effectiveness of the existing process for dealing the Budget and suggested that this be addressed. He commented that the Development and Environment Directorate dealt with many key priorities, that further reductions in that Directorate’s budget was probably impractical.

The Chairman reiterated his view made at a previous meeting, that Panels should be able to scrutinise budget heads outside their specific remits, and have the opportunity to identify savings.

Councillor Crockford-Hawley, Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport queried the practicality of the Chairman’s view, unless there was a single overarching Scrutiny Panel.

Councillor Shopland considered that the Panel should address staffing costs.

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment pointed out that the meetings of the MTFF/Budget Working Party had considered the 2007/08 Budget in detail on a line to line basis, and had addressed 7-8 areas in particular. He added the Working Party’s considerations had shown that there was a correlation between staffing and service provision, and that staffing could be reduced if servicing was similarly reduced.

Councillor Harley suggested looking across the Directorates for possible duplication.

Councillor Clark considered that Members should not get too involved in minutiae and should not seek to micro-manage Directorates.

Councillors Canniford and Wright commented on the need for more effective scrutiny.

SPE

Work Plan (Agenda Item 6.1)

Reference was made to the issue of connecting bus services with villages in North Somerset. Councillor Burden advised that this was a matter for the Working Group set up to look at the overall strategy and continued improvement of supported bus services in North Somerset and which was also to consider with the Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport the outcome of the tender process for supported bus services (SPE 54 refers, Members appointed – Councillors Peter Burden, Mark Canniford and Derek Kraft).

Concluded: that the Work Plan as presented be agreed.

SPE

Establishment of Working Group to investigate more cost effective ways of running Playhouse facilities (Agenda Item 6.3)

The representative of the Head of Performance, Improvement and Human Resources confirmed that this issue was already being addressed by the Community Services Policy and Scrutiny Panel.

The Chairman advised that the proposal was being put to this Panel because of the tourism aspect.

Some Members felt the matter should be left to the Community Services Policy and Scrutiny Panel and as a compromise, it was suggested that the report back to that Panel also be submitted to the Strategic Planning and Economic Development Policy and Scrutiny Panel.

Concluded: that the matter of more cost-effective ways of running the Playhouse facilities be left to the Community Services Policy and Scrutiny Panel, but that this Panel would welcome the report back when available.

SPE

Joint Local Transport Plan – Update (Agenda Item 6.3)

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment reported the receipt of a letter from the Department of Transport (DfT) regarding the Transport settlement for the West of England for 2007/08. He was pleased to report that the DfT had assessed the West of England’s Joint Local Transport Settlement as good (not far short of excellent) and had noted the Delivery Plan as very good. This had resulted in the award of an additional three per cent of funding to be shared across the four unitary authorities. A report would be submitted to the Executive in February 2007 regarding implementation.

It was pointed out that only a few years ago, the JTLP submission had been noted as poor so now to be noted good was particularly commendable.

Panel Members welcomed the good news. Councillor Burden commented that the DoT assessment showed how effectively the Members and officers of the four unitary authorities had worked together on this matter.

Councillor Crockford-Hawley, Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport concurred.

Councillor Burden asked the Panel’s thanks and congratulations to be conveyed to staff involved in preparing the submission.

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment in response to a query by Councillor Canniford, sought to explain the correlation between the quality and standard of the JTLP submission and the funding received. North Somerset would seek to address any areas of criticism and to focus on priority areas such as cycling and walking. Matters such as fares of public transport operators were outside the control of the unitary authorities.

Concluded: that the report be noted.

SPE

Kewstoke Toll Road – Update (Agenda Item 6.4)

The Chairman invited Mr Colin Hill, Clerk to Kewstoke Parish Council to address the Panel.

Mr Hill considered that the information in the report to the Panel was rather limited and lacked sufficient detail. He referred to the Parish Council’s concerns about (i) the increasing volume of traffic, (ii) the suggestion that if the toll was reintroduced permits to use the toll road be increased to £28, and (iii) the use of the toll road as a rat run causing danger in a residential area with a school in close proximity.

The Panel then considered the report which invited the Panel to provide their views on the reintroduction of the Kewstoke Toll Road Concession.

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment advised that the report had been produced in response to the Panel’s consideration of the matter on 9th August 2006, and sought to answer the questions from Panel Members to the Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport. He advised that there were three options:-

1.      Reintroduction of the Toll Road Concession.

2.      Continue to maintain as a private road without tolls.

3.      Adopt as a public highway.

Councillor Shopland enquired whether it was feasible to close the road.

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment commented that closing the toll road would have a significant impact as it was well used by vehicles. Attention was drawn to the annual traffic enumerator count. This did not however, indicate where vehicles had travelled from, and where they were travelling to. It was noted that the number of light goods vehicles and cars using the toll road had increased since the toll closed. The representative of the Director of Development and Environment added that restoring the current status of the road as a private road, would require it to be closed for one day per year. Reference was made to the Kewstoke Toll Road charges and the key variables that could have an impact on the revenue account if assumptions varied.

The Panel was informed that the cost of reintroducing the toll would be £104,000, including £20,000 for maintenance. This latter figure was currently included in the Development and Environment base budget. At present, minimal maintenance was carried out.

Councillor Shopland further queried why North Somerset should maintain the toll road for Kewstoke Parish Council and Weston-super-Mare Town Council, and suggested that the two Councils should assume responsibility.

Councillor Canniford commented that Weston-super-Mare Town Council had no wish to assume responsibility of the toll road.

The representative of the Director of Development and Environment confirmed that the toll road was of adoptable standard.

Councillor Porter, local member for Kewstoke, echoed the concerns expressed by the Clerk to Kewstoke Parish Council. He referred to the danger caused by speeding road vehicles linked to the absence of pavements, and the close proximity of the local school.

Councillor Shopland put forward a further option “that the toll road be closed, and the toll not collected”.

This was not supported by other Panel members.

Concluded: that with regard to the Kewstoke Toll Road, the Panel recommends to the Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport that the status quo continue, that further investigations take place with regard to traffic management and calming measurers in the vicinity of Kewstoke village.

SPE

Member Involvement in the Joint Waste Management and Planning Strategies (Agenda Item 6.5)

The Panel together with the Environmental Services Policy and Scrutiny Panel was asked to appoint a total of three members to the joint arrangements for shadowing the Executive Board dealing with the joint strategies for municipal waste management and waste planning.

The two Panels had previously agreed to appoint a total of six members. However, a meeting of the four unitary authority representatives had concluded that a total representation of twenty-four members was unwieldy.

Councillor Burden added that the intention was for each unitary authority (North Somerset, Bristol, South Gloucestershire and BANES) to have three named representatives (with substitutes permitted), and that other members could attend meetings on a non-voting basis.

Recommended to the Council: that three members be appointed in accordance with political balance from the membership of the Strategic Planning and Economic Development Policy and Scrutiny Panel and the Environmental Services Policy and Scrutiny Panel (with substitutes permitted) to the joint arrangements for shadowing the Executive Board dealing with the joint strategies for municipal waste management and waste planning; and that other members be permitted to attend on a non-voting basis.

It was further,

Concluded:

(1) that the Panels receive periodic reports on progress;

(2) that officers pursue agreement to the servicing arrangements

SPE

Report of the Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport (Agenda Item 6.6)

Councillor Canniford commented that North Somerset had yet to get its car parking fees and charges right. He suggested that North Somerset should look beyond neighbouring authorities to areas such as Torquay, Bournemouth, Weymouth and Brighton to get a better indication at what level car parking fees and charges should be set.

Concluded: that the report be noted.

SPE

Report of the Executive Member for Economic Development (Agenda Item 6.7)

Councillor Clark enquired as to what issues were deemed to be outstanding regarding Silica. It was understood that this related to the opening of the Kiosk.

Councillor Canniford queried why the Executive Member for Economic Development was responsible for sea defences, whilst the Executive Member for Strategic Planning and Transport was responsible for Sea Defences.

Members said they would welcome details of by way of a report back in the West of England Working Group for the 2012 Olympics.

Concluded: that the report be noted.

________________________________

Chairman

________________________________