Agenda for Environment Cabinet Member Meeting on Thursday, 31st March, 2011, 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 208 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall
Contact: Tanya Davies, Acting Democratic Services Manager
| 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: 114(a) Declarations of Interests 114a.1 There were none. 114(b) Exclusion of Press and Public 114b.1 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (“the Act”), the Cabinet Member 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 business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and 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(I) of the Act). 114b.2 RESOLVED - That the press and public be not excluded from the meeting. |
|
|
Minutes of the previous meeting Minutes of the Meeting held on 10 March 2011 (copy attached). Minutes: 115.1 RESOLVED - That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 March 2011 be approved as a correct record, subject to the following amendments:
(i) the insertion of the word ‘Member’ after ‘Cabinet’ at paragraph 105.2. (ii) the replacment of the word ‘were’ with ‘was’ at paragraph 106.1. |
|
|
Cabinet Member's Communications Minutes: 116.1 The Cabinet Member reported that The Lanes Car Park had won the award for ‘Best Refurbishment’ at the British Parking Awards and that the Cityclean call centre had won the award for ‘Customer Communication Strategy of the Year’ at the Institute of Customer Services Awards. He welcomed the national recognition and paid tribute to the officers whose hard work had resulted in the awards. |
|
|
Items reserved for discussion (a) Items reserved by the Cabinet Member
(b) Items reserved by the Opposition Spokespersons
(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: 117.1 RESOLVED – That all items be reserved for discussion. |
|
|
Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy attached). Minutes: 118(i) Consult on Queen's Park bowling green
118.1 Councillor Duncan presented an epetition and accompanying paper petition signed by a total of 113 people calling for the council to carry out a consultation on the future use of the Queen’s Park Bowling Green among all park users.
118.2 Councillor Duncan was unable to attend the meeting.
118.3 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted and a written response be provided.
118(ii) Parking Problems - Bakers Bottom
118.4 Mr Chris Cooke presented an epetition and accompanying paper petition signed by a total of 103 people calling for the council to consider the introduction of double yellow lines at the junctions of Rochester/Livingstone St, Bute/Livingstone St and Hendon/Livingstone St in the area commonly known as "Bakers Bottom", to alleviate the problem of cars causing an obstruction in the area.
118.5 The Cabinet Member confirmed that he would instruct officers to investigate current parking demands in the area.
118.6 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted.
118(iii) Hove Station Foot Bridge
118.7 Mr Adam Love had submitted an epetition signed by of 29 people concerning the maintenance and improvement of Hove Station Foot Bridge.
118.8 Mr Love was unable to attend the meeting.
118.9 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted and a written response be provided.
118(iv) Save Our Buses
118.10 Mr Tom French presented an epetition and accompanying paper petition signed by a total of 556 people calling for the council to protect subsidised bus routes from cuts, including the no. 21, 21B, 81, 81A and 22.
118.11 The Cabinet Member advised that, unlike other authorities, around the country, the Administration had fought hard to protect its bus services in difficult economic times to ensure our residents still had access to jobs, local amenities and the city centre.
118.12 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted.
118(v) Make Hollingdean Dip Safe
118.13 Ms Christina Summers presented an epetition and accompanying paper petition signed by a total of 835 people calling for the council to make the Hollingdean Dip safer to cross by reviewing the traffic calming measures in the area and taking steps to improve road safety.
118.14 The Cabinet Member advised that the council had already taken positive steps to improve road safety at “The Dip”. The road had undergone a number of improvements that included adjusting the road layout with dropped kerb crossing points that incorporated tactile paving for blind or partially sighted pedestrians and chicanes that forced vehicles to give way and slow down. Illuminated traffic calming signs had also been provided. Road safety data for the last 3 years showed that the measures had been effective as the number of collisions had fallen significantly compared with the original road layout.
The Cabinet Member explained that, while the council did not consider Hollingdean Dip to have a specific safety issue, it was sensitive to the concerns and perceptions of residents and so had developed a new methodology for assessing the requirements for pedestrian crossings that would not only take accidents into account, but also include pedestrian and vehicle counts, triggered by specific requests from residents. He stated that he would ask officers to look into the request with the new methodology in mind.
118.15 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted.
118(vi) George Street, Hove – change to opening hours
118.16 Councillor Young presented an paper petition signed by 56 traders and residents of George Street, Hove calling for a change to the street opening hours to 4pm daily effective from 1 April 2011 and continuing thereon.
118.17 The Cabinet Member advised that he would instruct officers to investigate the proposal, but as it would require a consultation and a Traffic Order and some re-negotiation with establishments who have tables and chairs outside on the carriageway, it could not be implemented from 1 April 2011.
118.18 RESOLVED – That the petition be noted. |
|
|
(The closing date for receipt of public questions is 12 noon on 24 March 2011)
(copy attached). Minutes: 119.1 The Cabinet Member reported that one public question had been received.
119.2 Mr Steve Hare asked the following question:
“The Pedestrian Crossing Assessment Methodology document talks of the need to include "public perception of dangerous roads, and the impact of crossings on community cohesion ", yet this isn’t scored in the assessment, nor are near misses, predictable risk increasing dynamic situations (cars overtaking buses at build-outs every ten minutes), factoring for number of children under 10 in the PV2 count (the highest percentage group within pedestrian fatalities) or adherence to speed limits. How will BHCC ensure that residents' daily experience of the dangerousness of the Hollingdean Dip (Hollingbury Place) is incorporated into the road safety assessment process?”
119.3 The Cabinet Member gave the following response:
“Thank you for your question.
The assessment methodology has been developed to ensure that all requests for pedestrian crossings in any road of the city can be consistently and robustly assessed, so those that can deliver the greatest benefit are prioritised for implementation. It will enable us to fairly and robustly consider the relative need for a crossing facility at the Hollingdean Dip compared to other potential locations across the city. If the result of the assessment suggests that the Hollingdean Dip should be considered a priority location then designs will be prepared, consultation carried out and a crossing facility implemented as soon as possible, subject to the availability of funding.
A report will be brought to the next Environment Cabinet Member Meeting on 26th May where consideration will be given to adopting this new methodology.
As you have obviously taken the time to consider the new methodology in some detail, I will ask officers to respond to you separately regarding the specific points you have raised in relation to the public perception of dangerous roads and near miss incidents, amongst other things.”
119.4 Mr Hare asked the following supplementary question:
“Even if BHCC decides to ignore the community’s experience and anecdotal evidence of near-misses in its assessment methodology in relation to the Hollingdean Dip, Local transport note 1/95 section 3.5.2. states that “if accidents are below average – may not be reasonable to predict a benefit in accident terms, although there may be other advantages if a crossing is installed”. What consideration does BHCC intend to give the fact that by installing a Zebra crossing and taking measures such as burning out central white lines on roads, planting trees to reduce line of sight or reducing speed-limits to 20 mph this will improve the quality of life for local residents, traders and visitors, reduce levels of anxiety when walking in the area, and strengthen the local sense of community?”
119.5 The Cabinet Member gave the following response:
“I will ask officers to respond to you on each of the specific points raised.” |
|
|
Deputations (The closing date for receipt of deputations is 12 noon on 24 March 2011)
No deputations received by date of publication. Minutes: 120.1 There were none. |
|
|
Letters from Councillors
(a) Parking in Springfield Road, Southdown Avenue, Rugby Road and Florence Road. Letter from Councillor Allen (copy attached).
(b) Parking in Kestrel Close. Letter from Councillor Bennett (copy attached).
(c) Parking in The Droveway. Letter from Councillor Bennett (copy attached). Additional documents: Minutes: 121a.1 A letter had been received from Councillor Allen concerning parking in Springfield Road, Southdown Avenue, Rugby Road and Florence Road and the timetable for the proposed review of the Area J controlled parking zone. He asked for confirmation of when the impact assessment would take place and whether spare permits in Area J could be made available to the residents in the area who wished to purchased them, despite not living within that parking zone.
121a.2 The Cabinet Member reported that a number of residents throughout the City had asked for their roads to be consulted for controlled parking as part of a parking scheme. A citywide parking review was planned for later in the year and it would look at various aspects of controlled parking, including requests from residents and ward councillors to review existing parking schemes, therefore assessment on any one zone could not begin before the review had taken place and a timetable had been consulted upon and approved.
The Cabinet Member noted the request for residents in roads immediately to the north of the scheme to be able to apply to purchase Area J permits; currently the council did not allow households on the edge of a parking scheme to apply for permits for adjacent zones because of capacity issues. However, this would also be investigated as part of the citywide parking review.
121a.3 RESOLVED – That the letter be noted.
121b.1 A letter had been received from Councillor Bennett calling for Kestrel Close to be included in the surrounding CPZ at the request of the residents who were experiencing serious problems trying to park in their road.
121b.2 The Cabinet Member stated that residents asked to be excluded from the scheme during the original consultation. The citywide parking review later in the year would look at various aspects of controlled parking and include requests from residents and ward councillors to review or extend existing parking schemes.
The Cabinet Member advised that, in view of their previously expressed position, it would be helpful if residents could gather support for the proposal by submitting a petition to a future Environment Cabinet Member Meeting.
121b.3 RESOLVED – That the letter be noted.
121c.1 A letter had been received from Councillor Bennett calling for parking restrictions to be implemented in The Droveway to alleviate the problems experienced by residents.
121c.2 The Cabinet Member confirmed that he would instruct officers to investigate current parking demands in the road and consider the way forward.
121c.3 RESOLVED – That the letter be noted. |
|
|
Written Questions from Councillors No written questions have been received. Minutes: 122.1 There were none. |
|
|
Notices of Motions No Notices of Motion have been received. Minutes: 123.1 There were none. |
|
|
Planning Brief - Park House Site
Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached). Additional documents: Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member notes the results of the public consultation exercise that have been taken into account in the preparation of the planning brief (see Appendix 2).
(2) That the Cabinet Member approves the planning brief in order to provide planning guidance to developers and assist the council in the assessment of future development proposals and planning applications concerning the site. Minutes: 124.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place concerning the consultation process undertaken in relation to the development of a planning brief for the Park House site and seeking approval of the planning brief.
124.2 The Cabinet Member explained that the site had been the subject of two refused planning applications and two appeals. He was pleased that a Planning Brief had been prepared which sought to provide clarity on the planning requirements for the site. A Public Exhibition had been held in February generating 70 written responses. The Brief addressed all of the themes that emerged as key issues from the public consultation and sought to balance the various planning issues relating to the site with the developer’s concerns. It would be used to provide up-to-date planning guidance to developers and would also be a material planning consideration in the determination of planning applications relating to the site.
124.3 Councillor Bennett, ward councillor for Hove Park ward where the site was situated, advised that she and her ward colleague, Councillor Brown, were supportive of the outcome of the consultation.
124.1 The Cabinet Member noted that Councillor Davis, ward councillor for neighbouring Goldsmid ward, had written to him to express her broad support for the Planning Brief.
124.2 Ms Valerie Paynter from ‘saveHOVE’ stated that the resulting Planning Brief took full account of the comments made during the public consultation and was pleased that residents had been listened to.
124.3 The Planning Projects Manager explained that the consultation results had been carefully incorporated into the Planning Brief. He recognised that, although the developer was not supportive of all elements of the Brief, the council was confident that it would enable them to move forward and that it would ultimately result in an appropriate scheme.
124.4 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendations:
(1) That the results of the public consultation exercise that have been taken into account in the preparation of the planning brief (see Appendix 2) be noted.
(2) That the planning brief be approved in order to provide planning guidance to developers and assist the council in the assessment of future development proposals and planning applications concerning the site. |
|
|
Tax Free Bike Scheme Contract Renewal Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached). Decision: (1) That the Cabinet Member approves the award of the Tax Free Bike Scheme contract to P&MM Limited commencing 1 April 2011 for a period of two years, with a potential extension of up to 24 months thereafter. Minutes: 125.1 The Cabinet Member considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place concerning renewal of the contract for the council’s tax free bike scheme for staff.
125.2 RESOLVED - That having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet Member accepted the following recommendation:
(1) That the Tax Free Bike Scheme contract be awarded to P&MM Limited commencing 1 April 2011 for a period of two years, with a potential extension of up to 24 months thereafter.
125.1 The Cabinet Member stated that it was the final meeting of the Administration’s four year term and that local elections would take place in May. He wished to place on record his thanks to the officers who had provided administrative, legal and technical advice and support during that time, and also to the councillors and members of the public who had attended the meetings. |