Meeting documents

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked Mr Tompson for an indication of the timescales for the project.

Mr Tompson said that the indications were that in the longer term the timescales were from 01-Jan-08 for 5 years but that the group would have preferred 3 years.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE asked whether the group had taken into consideration that planning permissions must be agreed and whether the group had begun fund raising for the project.

Mr Tompson said that planning applications had been submitted and fund raising had already started.

Councillor Gitte Dawson said that she wished to thank Councillors Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE and Paul Crossley for their expressions of support for the project. She hoped that Sustrans would fund £1.2m, and that of the remaining £0.8m the Council would have to find only half over several years as there were other funding sources that could be approached for a share. She said the project was speculative as it depended on winning a Big Lottery award but that the proposals were very attractive and must have great support particularly since the route would link to National Cycle Route 24 which would provide a route all the way to Midsomer Norton.

Councillor Jonathan Gay asked whether there would be safety issues because of the lengths of the two tunnels.

Councillor GD agreed that safety issues had been considered. The tunnels would be lit and similar tunnels were operating successfully and safely.

Councillor Gitte Dawson made an ad hoc statement in which she welcomed the new planning initiatives, especially the extra protection afforded to unlisted buildings. She felt that the council should press developers to build more sustainably and regretted that this was not yet included in the Council's planning policies.

Councillor Gerry Curran, in proposing the item, pointed out that the Overview and Scrutiny Panel had conducted a review of Climate Change and said that he would be responding in the near future. He felt that this would address many sustainability issues.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE seconded the proposal.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney said that he would welcome officers' comments to the issues raised by Councillors Bellotti and Dawson.

The Chair invited Vaughan Thompson (Strategic Manager - Planning Services) to respond to the questions raised.

The Strategic Manager - Planning Services explained that the Local Development Scheme (LDS) would be the launch into the next 3 years of policy development and that issues of affordable housing, student accommodation and sustainable development could be addressed in future SPDs. While there were at present no plans to develop a sustainable housing SPD, this was because the Council would have been criticised had the proposals been more than could have realistically been delivered within the available resources. It was anticipated that other SPDs would be added in the future when resources allowed.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked how this might happen.

The Strategic Manager - Planning Services said that the basis for creating additional SPDs would be there once the LDS had been adopted.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney said that the Executive must be clear about what was being asked. The issues being raised would require another report, for future consideration.

Councillor Francine Haeberling agreed and said that the Executive should address the current proposals which would lay the foundation for future proposals.

Councillor Vic Pritchard said that Councillor Bellotti's ideas, including the point about 2-storey houses, would best be met by means of a delivery plan based on existing policy.

Councillor Paul Crossley pointed out that houses of multiple occupancy were not only student accommodation - many were occupied by more than one family as a result of poverty.

Councillor Gerry Curran, in summing up, said that there had been some discussion about how members could be involved in planning policy after the local elections in May and the issues discussed today could be raised then. He reminded Executive members of the need to agree the tabled proposals as the basis for the future. He offered to meet with Councillors Bellotti and Dawson to discuss their points.

Rationale

The preparation and maintenance of an up-to-date Local Development Scheme is a statutory requirement of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Act and Planning Policy Statement 12 "Local Development Frameworks" provide clear guidance on the form and content of the LDS. Failure to maintain an up-to-date Local Development Scheme would contravene the Act, may result in the Secretary of State directing the Council to produce an LDS and would result in the failure to meet Best Value Performance Indicators 200a and 200b.

On a motion from Councillor Gerry Curran, seconded by Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, it was

(1) To agree the revised Local Development Scheme for submission to the Government Office for the South West;

(2) That the revised Local Development Scheme comes into effect on 11th April 2007; and

(3) To delegate authority to the Assistant Director for Planning & Transport Development, in conjunction with the Council Executive Member for Sustainability & the Environment, to make minor consequential and editorial amendments to the Local Development Scheme.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal and said that he felt that buses were the only viable way to reduce car use. The proposals would link all the Council's communities including improved links with Bristol.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney reminded the Executive that this was another project which required the Council to work with other neighbouring authorities. There was a need for an effective vehicle for delivery of the project. If the governance and project management was done effectively, the risks would be minimised.

Councillor Hanney proposed an amendment to the proposal which would ensure the monitoring of project management and governance arrangements.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE summed up by pointing out the substantial government investment to improve congestion.

Rationale

The implications of not making the bid for full approval to the Department for Transport would be significant in terms of our work with the other Joint Local Transport Plan partners and our aspirations for further major transport investment.

On a motion from Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

(1) That the Greater Bristol Bus Network Major Scheme be submitted to the Department for Transport for Full Approval;

(2) That the project management approach for the scheme as summarised in the report be noted and incorporated into the legal agreement;

(3) That the Council enters into a Legal Agreement with the North Somerset, Bristol City and South Gloucestershire Councils and the funding department which defines the roles and responsibilities of all signatories;

(4) That the Council enters into a Memorandum of Understanding with First Group and the other Councils referred to, including entering into a Statutory Quality Bus Partnership and a Quality Bus Agreement as appropriate;

(5) That the Council accepts in principle the need to fund the additional £219k from future LTP settlements to meet its share of the increased scheme cost outlined in the report;

(6) That to meet the future maintenance requirements of the project, which are yet to be quantified in detail, and which in turn will need to be negotiated with the Department for Transport, an appropriate provision will subsequently be included within future Service Plans; and

(7) That the project management and governance arrangements at Council and at West of England partnership levels are reported and considered at Project Programme Board with their views reported to subsequent Executive meetings.

There were no factual questions from Executive members.

Councillor Caroline Roberts made an ad hoc statement in which she asked whether the river paths in her ward were designated as green space. She said that she received many letters from constituents asking about the care of trees and river paths and she hoped that the Executive would consider increasing the number of trees on the roadside. Many local sites could be improved by appointing a "friends" group of local residents to care for the site.

Councillor Gitte Dawson felt that the Green Space Team should be consulted on all planning applications before any decision was taken.

The Chair invited Matthew Smith (Assistant Director - Environmental Services) to respond to the questions raised.

The Assistant Director - Environmental Services said that river paths were not currently included as defined green space. He said that parks managers had always worked closely with the Allotments Association and had found the group's input valuable. The issue of latent demand had not been fully addressed but he reminded the Executive that it was necessary to be able to defend the Council's proposals if challenged by developers and while the proposed figure could be defended, the one quoted by the Allotments Association was based on evidence which could not be easily defended. He agreed that in the past some trees lost by the roadside had not been replaced but that all lost trees are now replaced as a matter of course. He confirmed that the suggestion by Councillor Dawson to ensure that all planning applications are considered in advance by a parks officer was already being put in place.

Councillor Paul Crossley, in proposing the item, paid tribute to over 2 years of hard work by the Assistant Director - Environmental Services and his officers. The strategy would provide a means to improve and safeguard essential green space.

Councillor Jonathan Gay seconded the proposal.

Rationale

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Jonathan Gay, it was

(1) To adopt the Green Space Strategy as a corporate strategy and to approve the action plan included as Section 12 of the Strategy.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE seconded the proposal and said that it was vital for members of the public to know how to become involved with the Council.

Councillor Francine Haeberling supported the proposals and pointed out the irony of the fact that when the Regional Spatial Strategy would be discussed in public in the near future by the Regional Assembly, District and Parish Councillors would be prevented from addressing the Assembly.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney emphasised the importance of ensuring the involvement of Parish Councillors in consultation.

Councillor Vic Pritchard agreed, saying that Parishes are often unable to respond at short notice.

Councillor Paul Crossley said that people who contribute to consultation should be informed of the outcome of the consultation and that to reduce postage costs, this could be done by email.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE pointed out that there had been an improved response from Parishes in recent months, which should be built on.

In summing up, Councillor Gerry Curran said that the 6-week consultation period was statutory. He emphasised that Parishes had been consulted about these proposals and their contribution was important. He agreed with the points made about the inadequate arrangements for contributions at the regional Spatial Strategy Hearing in Public but emphasised that this was a Regional Assembly issue and was not within the control of the Council.

Rationale

None.

On a motion from Councillor Gerry Curran, seconded by Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins OBE, it was

(1) To recommend to Council that the Submission Statement of Community Involvement be approved for submission to the Secretary of State and for a six week period of statutory public consultation; and

(2) To delegate to the Assistant Director Planning and Transport Development in conjunction with Council Executive Member for Sustainability and the Environment the authority to make minor editorial, formatting and presentation changes to the document prior to being submitted to the Secretary of State and published for public consultation.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney responded by saying that there had been proper controls in place but that inevitably some very large budgets sometimes overspend. Much of the Transportation overspend was unforeseen because of the drop in parking revenue and the imposition by government of additional unfounded responsibilities. Social Services had greatly improved their position, as had Tourism, Leisure and Culture. He agreed that virements should be announced as promptly as possible in order that members are kept fully informed. In moving the proposals, he said that Government had recently announced a £1.1m award towards last year's budget, which had taken the Council from a deficit position last year into an unexpected surplus position but that the government had prevented the Council from taking this into account when setting this year's budget.

Councillor Paul Crossley in seconding the proposal wished to emphasise that unlike private business, the Council had the additional responsibility of reporting all its affairs to the public. This inevitably added pressures to the timescales for publication of information.

Councillor Francine Haeberling reminded Councillor Bellotti of the positive impact on the Social Services budget of the sale of some Elderly Persons Homes. She reminded the Executive that the increasing age of the population was a constant pressure on Social services budgets which was not fully funded by government.

Rationale

None.

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

(1) That Directors will continue to work towards managing within budget in the current year for their respective service areas, and to manage below budget where possible by not committing unnecessary expenditure through tight budget control;

(2) To note this year's revenue budget position as highlighted in the reprot;

(3) To note the capital expenditure position for the Council in the financial year to the end of December and the year end projections detailed in the report;

(4) To approve the 2006/07 virements and to note the changes in the capital programme; and

(5) To approve the 2007/08 virements.

The Chair then proposed that Appendix C of the papers was exempt for the reasons stated in the Public Interest Test. This was seconded by Councillor Gerry Curran and agreed unanimously.

Councillor Gerry Curran, in proposing the main recommendations, said he was pleased to report that the Council was improving its rate of recycling and was working effectively with neighbouring authorities to deal with cross-border issues.

Councillor Jonathan Gay seconded the proposal and expressed satisfaction that it had been recognised that the in-house provision offered better value than could be provided by a contract with a service provider. He said that this demonstrated a confidence in the Council's own staff.

Councillor Paul Crossley agreed and emphasised that the in-house option had been chosen because the Council was obliged to deliver best value. He asked whether the period of 10-14 years quoted in section 1 of the report was too long.

The Chair invited the Assistant Director - Environmental Services to respond to the question.

The Assistant Director - Environmental Services said that the figure of 10-14 years related only to the proposed contract with an external provider but did not relate to the selection of in-house provision. The Council would not therefore be prevented from reconsidering this issue in the future if required.

Councillor Gerry Curran thanked the front-line work force for the excellent service they provide to the residents of every home in the authority.

Rationale

As part of the tender evaluation process the option of externalising these services to a private contractor was considered but rejected as this showed no margin of best value gain.

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Gerry Curran, it was

(1) That Appendix C Results of Tenders Received constitutes exempt information according to the categories set out in the Local government Act 1972 (amended Schedule 12A) because it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of a particular person (including the authority holding that information), and therefore that the public interest is best served by exemption of the information;

(3) That the collection, bulking and selling of recycled materials will be put through a further procurement process to ensure best value.