Agenda for Environment Cabinet Member Meeting on Thursday, 7th May, 2009, 4.00pm
navigation and tools
Find it
You are here - Home : Council and Democracy : Councillors and Committees : Agenda, decisions and minutes
Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 213 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Tanya Massey, Acting Senior Democratic Services Officer
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Procedural Business
(b) Exclusion of Press and Public - To consider whether, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, or the nature of the proceedings, the press and public should be excluded from the meeting when any of the following items are under consideration.
NOTE: Any item appearing in Part 2 of the Agenda states in its heading either that it is confidential or the category under which the information disclosed in the report is exempt from disclosure and therefore not available to the public.
A list and description of the categories of exempt information is available for public inspection at Brighton and Hove Town Halls.
Minutes: 134a Declarations of Interests
134a.1 Councillor Mitchell declared a personal, but non-prejudicial, interest in Item 147, which concerned waiting and loading restrictions outside of controlled parking zones, as she lived in a road that was included in the report.
134b.2 Councillor Kitcat also declared a personal, but non-prejudicial, interest in Item 147 as he was a patient at the doctors surgery in Links Road, which was a road included in the report.
134b Exclusion of Press and Public
134b.1 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’), the Cabinet Member for Environment] considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press or public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I(1) of the Act).
134b.2 RESOLVED – That the press and public be not excluded from the meeting. |
|
|
Minutes of the previous meeting Minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2009 (copy attached). Minutes: 135.1 RESOLVED– The minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2009 were approved and signed by the Cabinet Member as a correct record. |
|
|
Cabinet Member's Communications Minutes: 136.1 There were none. |
|
|
Items reserved for discussion (a) Items reserved by the Cabinet Member
(b) Items reserved by the Opposition Spokespeople
(c) Items reserved by Members, with the agreement of the Cabinet Member.
NOTE: Public Questions, Written Questions from Councillors, Petitions, Deputations, Letters from Councillors and Notices of Motion will be reserved automatically. Minutes: 137.1 RESOLVED– That all the items be reserved for discussion. |
|
|
Report of the Acting Director of Strategy & Governance (copy attached). Minutes: 138(i) Petition – Park and Ride bus service
138.1 Councillor Lepper had submitted a petition signed by 1710 people concerning withdrawal of the Park and Ride bus service from Withdean, Brighton.
138.2 Councillor Lepper was unable to attend the meeting.
138.3 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted and a written response be provided.
138(ii) Petition – siting of communal bins
138.4 Councillor Elgood had submitted a petition signed by 9 people concerning the siting of communal bins in Brunswick Street East and Upper and Lower Market Street.
138.5 Councillor Watkins presented the petition on behalf on Councillor Elgood who was unable to attend the meeting.
138.6 The Cabinet Member agreed that the issue of siting a communal bin in the vicinity of those streets needed to be resolved, and he appreciated that residents had been patient. The Cabinet Member was happy to ask officers to meet with the ward councillors to resolve the issue and he thanked them for all the assistance they had given during the roll out of communal bins in their ward.
138.7 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted.
138(iii) Petition – installation of speed camera in King George VI Avenue
138.8 Councillor Bennett presented a petition signed by 48 people requesting installation of a speed camera in King George VI Avenue.
138.9 Councillor Bennett was unable to attend the meeting.
138.10 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted and a written response be provided.
138(iv) Petition – London Road improvements
138.11 Councillor Davey had submitted a petition signed by 1067 people concerning issues and improvements relating to the development of London Road.
138.12 Councillor Davey was unable to attend the meeting.
138.13 The Cabinet Member commented that the issue would be dealt with later on the agenda.
138.14 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted and a written response be provided.
138(v) Petition – seafront parking charges
138.15 Councillor Mitchell had submitted a petition signed by 174 people requesting reduction in seafront parking charges during the wonter months.
138.16 Mr Randall, Director of Yellowave beach sports venue, presented the petition and Councillor Mitchell spoke in support of the proposals.
138.17 The Cabinet Member advised that a report on this issue would be considered later on the agenda and thanked Mr Randall and the other businesses in the area for the work they had been doing to regenerate the area.
138.18 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted. |
|
|
Public Questions (The closing date for receipt of public questions is 12 noon on 29 April 2009)
No public questions received by date of publication. Minutes: 139.1 There were none. |
|
|
(The closing date for receipt of deputations is 12 noon on 29 April 2009)
(a) Deputation concerning London Road. Ms Christina Summers (Spokeperson) Additional documents: Minutes: 140.1 The Cabinet Member reported that one deputation had been referred to meeting. It concerned development in the London Road area (for copy see minute book).
140.2 The Cabinet Member invited the spokespeople for the deputation, Ms Summers and Ms Brown to briefly outline their concerns as they had already done so when the deputation was presented to Full Council in January.
140.3 The Cabinet Member advised that the council was aware of the many issues relating to the London Road area and was committed to providing a planning policy framework that would help bring about widespread improvements to the economy, appearance and safety of the area to benefit local businesses, shoppers, residents, and other visitors.
140.4 The Cabinet Member added that a masterplan for the area had now been prepared in the form of a draft Supplementary Planning Document, and was the subject of a report under Agenda Item 148.
140.5 RESOLVED – That the deputation be noted. |
|
|
Letters from Councillors No letters have been received. Minutes: 141.1 There were none. |
|
|
Written Questions from Councillors No written questions have been received. Minutes: 142.1 There were none. |
|
|
Notices of Motion No Notices of Motion have been received. Minutes: 143.1 There were none. |
|
|
Waste Management Strategy & Consultation Plan
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment endorses the Draft Waste Management Strategy.
(2) That the Cabinet Member for Environment approves the proposed consultation plan for the strategy. Minutes: 144.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning a draft waste management strategy for the city (for copy see minute book).
144.2 The Cabinet Member explained that the draft strategy was a robust deliverable plan to improve achieve a 4% increase in recycling performance, from 28% to 32% and minimise the total amount of waste produced. The Cabinet Member added that residents could rest assured that fortnightly refuse collections would not be introduced and surveillance cameras would not be used.
144.3 Councillor Mitchell was broadly supportive of the strategy, but was concerned that it focussed too much on communications and awareness as a means to achieve targets.
144.4 Councillor Kitcat echoed Councillor Mitchell’s remarks and commented that there was a need to reduce the total amount of waste by changing buying behaviour. He added that it was disappointing that the proposed targets were lower that Government and European Union targets.
144.5 Councillor Watkins added that was a need to meeting demand for communal recycling in city centre locations.
144.6 In response to questions from opposition councillors the Head of Strategy for City Services made the following comments:
§ Recycling services for high and low-rise flats could be expanded to include cardboard and plastic bottles. § Officers were in contact with the Older People’s Council on issues around green waste collection. § There was no date set for the ‘supermarket summit’ yet, but the issue of reducing packaging remained important. § A communications campaign and communal recycling trial was being proposed to improve recycling rates. § More research needed to be done before the council could consider the possibility of recycling food waste. § Tetra paks currently made up less than 1% of the waste stream; recycling facilities more abundant materials took precedence at this stage. § The strategy should be seen as a detailed action plan with realistic, deliverable targets; it was widely accepted that national targets were harder for urban authorities to reach.
144.7 The Cabinet Member added that he was happy for any councillors to meet with officers to discuss further there concerns around the waste strategy and encouraged residents to engage in the consultation process.
144.8 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendations:
(1) That the Draft Waste Management Strategy be endorsed.
(2) That the proposed consultation plan for the strategy be approved. |
|
|
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment agrees to amend the recently advertised TRO “the Brighton & Hove Seafront (Various Restrictions) Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No *200* to change the detail of the winter tariff and also the roads in which the tariff will apply. The new tariff will apply in Madeira Drive and Kingsway only, elsewhere the existing tariffs will now remain unchanged. Minutes: 145.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning proposals to reduce seafront parking tariffs during winter months (for copy see minute book).
145.2 Councillors Mitchell and Watkins supported the proposal and thanked the Cabinet Member for listening to local businesses; the measures would serve to ease the pressure on businesses in the current economic climate.
145.3 Councillor Kitcat opposed the proposal on the basis that it undermined public transport and encouraged more cars to come in to the city.
145.4 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendation:
(1) That the recently advertised TRO “the Brighton & Hove Seafront (Various Restrictions) Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No *200* be amended to change the detail of the winter tariff and also the roads in which the tariff will apply. The new tariff will apply in Madeira Drive and Kingsway only, elsewhere the existing tariffs will now remain unchanged. |
|
|
Resident Parking Schemes re-consultation
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment approves:
(a) That Millers Road, Compton Road & Inwood Crescent be progressed as part of the Preston Park Station area to the final design and included in the draft Traffic Regulation Order to be advertised.
(b) That an order be placed for all additional pay and display equipment required for the proposed parking scheme. Minutes: 146.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning the outcome of the resident parking scheme re-consultation for the Millers Road, Compton Road & Inwood Crescent area (for copy see minute book).
146.2 Councillor Ken Norman, ward councillor for the area, supported the new proposals, which would benefit residents in the area.
146.3 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendation:
(1) That it be approved:
(a) That Millers Road, Compton Road & Inwood Crescent be progressed as part of the Preston Park Station area to the final design and included in the draft Traffic Regulation Order to be advertised.
(b) That an order be placed for all additional pay and display equipment required for the proposed parking scheme. |
|
|
Waiting and Loading Restrictions Outside of Controlled Parking Zones
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment is recommended to (having taken into account all the duly made representations and objections) approve the (waiting & loading/unloading restrictions and parking places) consolidation order2008 amendment order no.* 200*with the following amendments:
(a) Proposed double yellow lines in Downsview Road, Farm Close, Hawthorn Way, Worcester Villas, Old School Place, South Street, Goodwood Way, Lincoln Street, Grantham Road and Holmes Avenue are to be removed from the Traffic Order due to the amount of objection from local residents;
(b) Proposed motorcycle in Roundhill Crescent to be removed from this order and to be considered when consulting on a London Road Station resident parking scheme later in the year.
(c) The proposed changes outlined in paragraphs 3.5 & 3.6 of the report. Minutes: 147.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning various waiting & loading restrictions outside of controlled parking zones (for copy see minute book).
147.2 Councillor McCaffery thanked officers for taking into account objections from residents regarding proposed double yellow lines in Grantham Road and was assured by officers that the type of activity carried out by the business requesting the loading bay in Grantham Road was unlikely to make a difference to its need for the bay.
147.3 Councillor Barnett was given assurance by officers that the report recommended not to proceed with double yellow lines in Holmes Avenue and that any traffic management issues would be passed to the relevant department.
147.4 Officers also confirmed to Councillor Barnet that the proposed one-hour parking bays in Links Road were recommended for approval.
147.5 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendation:
(1) That (having taken into account all the duly made representations and objections) the (waiting & loading/unloading restrictions and parking places) consolidation order2008 amendment order no.* 200* be approved with the following amendments:
(a) Proposed double yellow lines in Downsview Road, Farm Close, Hawthorn Way, Worcester Villas, Old School Place, South Street, Goodwood Way, Lincoln Street, Grantham Road and Holmes Avenue are to be removed from the Traffic Order due to the amount of objection from local residents;
(b) Proposed motorcycle in Roundhill Crescent to be removed from this order and to be considered when consulting on a London Road Station resident parking scheme later in the year.
(c) The proposed changes outlined in paragraphs 3.5 & 3.6 of the report. |
|
|
London Road Central Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)
Report of the Director of Environment (copy circulated separately). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the draft Supplementary Planning Document on London Road Central Masterplan be approved for the purposes of formal public consultation. Minutes: 148.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning approval of a draft Supplementary Planning Document on London Road Central Masterplan for the purposes of formal public consultation (for copy see minute book).
148.2 The Cabinet member explained that the emerging masterplan had already been through an early round of consultation with stakeholders, an internal officer and member workshop last November, and a further workshop last week attended by members of two scrutiny committees and local ward members. He added that the document identified opportunities to upgrade the area, particularly in respect of the public realm and built environment, which would enhance the safety of the area and help local traders.
148.3 Councillor Mitchell praised the proposals relating to the public realm, permeability and prioritising pedestrians, but was concerned about parking spaces and that the SWAT analysis raised issues around traffic flow.
148.4 Councillor Kitcat echoed Councillor Mitchell remarks regarding traffic flow, highlighted issues around pollution and showed concern that the SPD did not seem to include anything to restrict a development proposal from Tesco.
148.5 In response to concerns the Assistant Director for City Planning explained that the SPD aimed to provide a creative framework for development in light of the current economic climate and that it had not been written with any specific developers in mind. The document was deliberately non-prescriptive and was meant to guide the council through the development process. He added that the SWAT analysis was intended to be open and honest, and any issues raised would be picked up during the consultation process.
148.6 The Assistant Director for Sustainable Transport assured councillors that urban mobility was important, with congestion and pollution both key to the existing Local Transport Plan. Once officers were able to better understand the impact of cumulative development it was hoped that a citywide transport model would be forthcoming.
148.7 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendation:
(1) That the draft Supplementary Planning Document on London Road Central Masterplan be approved for the purposes of formal public consultation. |
|
|
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment approves a response to the Government that:
(a) Welcomes the review to the sub regional apportionment and notes that the methodology proposed needs to continue to recognise the particular circumstances of East Sussex/Brighton & Hove, which has low production of land won resources and that they exist in the very far east of East Sussex County and the City relies heavily on marine dredged aggregates for local construction.
(b) Notes that the City Council supports the County Council in supporting a sub regional allocation for East Sussex / Brighton & Hove of 0.07m tonnes pa and would object to any increase in this allocation;
(c) Notes that the City Council agrees with the County Council in not supporting the splitting of the apportionment to separately identify soft sand; see 3.3 / 3.4. Minutes: 149.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment concerning approval to respond to government to support the sub-regional land-won allocation for East Sussex County Council and Brighton & Hove City Council (for copy see minute book).
149.2 Councillor Mitchell supported the objection to any increase in marine dredging for aggregates and hoped that the council would continue to learn from the One Planet Living project and increase our use of recycled materials.
149.3 The Head of Planning Strategy confirmed that the Waste and Minerals Development Framework would look at converting the waste stream into the mineral stream, but added that marine dredging was currently the most sustainable method for bringing aggregates into the city.
149.4 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendations:
(1) To approve a response to the Government that:
(a) Welcomes the review to the sub regional apportionment and notes that the methodology proposed needs to continue to recognise the particular circumstances of East Sussex/Brighton & Hove, which has low production of land won resources and that they exist in the very far east of East Sussex County and the City relies heavily on marine dredged aggregates for local construction.
(b) Notes that the City Council supports the County Council in supporting a sub regional allocation for East Sussex / Brighton & Hove of 0.07m tonnes pa and would object to any increase in this allocation;
(c) Notes that the City Council agrees with the County Council in not supporting the splitting of the apportionment to separately identify soft sand; see 3.3 / 3.4. |
|
|
Omission of Green Ridge from the intended South Downs National Park
Report of the Director of Environment (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment:
(a) Agrees that strong representations should be made to the Secretary of State to raise concerns that he has not clearly set out the reasons for excluding Green ridge;
(b) Requests that he set out his reasoning for proposing to exclude part of the Green Ridge SNCI which meets the boundary setting criteria for the South Downs National Park together with the western part of the road embankments along Mill Road from the intended South Downs National Park;
(c) Request that the Secretary of State redraws the boundary of the South Downs National Park further west along the junction between Green Ridge and the Devil’s Dyke Road, therby including the land at Green Ridge in the proposed South Downs National Park. Minutes: 150.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Director of Environment seeking approval for requesting that the Secretary of State reconsiders the proposed boundary of the South Downs National Park at Green Ridge and amends the boundary to include land at Green Ridge. (for copy see minute book).
150.2 The Cabinet Member explained that he had brought the report to the meeting as an urgent item because a number of residents and amenity groups had contacted him with concerns about the omission of Green Ridge from the Intended South Downs National Park.
150.3 Opposition councillors supported the proposal and commended the quick response.
150.4 Councillor Mrs Norman, ward councillor for one of the affected wards, echoed the support and highlighted the ongoing work by residents to protect the area; she hoped that the omission had been unintentional.
150.5 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report the following recommendation be accepted:
(1) That the Cabinet Member for Environment:
(a) Agrees that strong representations should be made to the Secretary of State to raise concerns that he has not clearly set out the reasons for excluding Green ridge;
(b) Requests that he set out his reasoning for proposing to exclude part of the Green Ridge SNCI which meets the boundary setting criteria for the South Downs National Park together with the western part of the road embankments along Mill Road from the intended South Downs National Park;
(c) Request that the Secretary of State redraws the boundary of the South Downs National Park further west along the junction between Green Ridge and the Devil’s Dyke Road, therby including the land at Green Ridge in the proposed South Downs National Park. |