Agenda and minutes

(Director of Governance)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted that there were no substitute members for this meeting.

To agree the notes of the last meeting held on 15 March 2016.

The notes of the last meeting held on 15 March 2016 were agreed.

(Director of Governance). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a pecuniary or a non-pecuniary interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 9 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a non-pecuniary interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 9 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Members Code of Conduct.

(Lead Officer & Chairman) to consider the attached report on the draft terms of reference for this committee.

Terms of Reference

The Committee considered their newly amended Terms of Reference which omitted reference from the newly established Communities Select Committee. They noted that each Select Committee was now aligned to their corresponding directorates and agreed their proposed Terms of Reference.

Work Programme

The Committee next considered their work programme and noted the cyclical items that were that were populating the current programme. The Committee agreed the programme noting that they could ask for items to be added during the course of the year as long as it was within their Terms of Reference.

(Director of Neighbourhoods) to consider the update on the current position of the Local Plan.

The Director of Neighbourhoods introduced the Local Plan Update report. The Committee noted that an updated Local Plan Development Scheme was due to go to Cabinet on 21 July 2016 which reflected the new timescales for the development of the Local Plan. They noted that the key milestones prior to the consultation on the Draft Plan were:

·         08 October 2016 – report to Cabinet to consider draft plan for consultation;

·         18 October 2016 – report to Full Council; and

·         31 October 2016 – start of 6 week formal consultation.

This would tie in with the publications of draft plans by East Herts, Uttlesford and Harlow Districts seeking representations on soundness under Regulation 19 of the Local Plan regulations.

The Committee noted that the government had made it clear that they expected that all local planning authorities should have a post National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) local plan in place and had set out their commitments to take action to get plans in place and ensure there were up to date policies. One of the penalties proposed for not having produced a plan was the loss of new homes bonus. Epping Forest was one of the 21 authorities at risk of intervention.

Under the duty to cooperate, the Sustainable Development Board was provided with an update on progress with the evaluation of the 5 spatial options previously agreed for testing and work was underway to evaluate the options through transport modelling, sustainability appraisal, deliverability appraisal and the habitat regulations assessment. The Board also received three draft memoranda of understanding, one with Highways England to cover strategic transport matters (including junction 7a), one with Natural England to cover air quality and a third to set out the vision for the SHMA area and agree the distribution of growth.

Various Member workshops have been held recently, one on climate change and one on transport accessibility and parking standards. Further workshops were planned for 16 July and 28 July 2016.

It was noted that the green belt review had largely been concluded and that the examiner’s report for the Moreton, Bobbingworth and the Lavers Neighbourhood Plan had been received. The examiner found that it did not meet the basic conditions and as required it was proposed to report this to the Cabinet on 21 July with a recommendation that the plan does not go to referendum.

Councillor Bedford noted that by September last year Highways England had not signed up to anything; had there been any movement since? The Planning Policy Portfolio Holder, Councillor Philip said that officers and members from this and other authorities had met with the under secretary for Transport recently where they asked for more cooperation and expressed their disappointment with them. A sensible strategy on transport was needed to enable us to progress our plan. Highways England should now be more helpful and cooperative.

Councillor Janet Whitehouse asked what the consultation would be on. Councillor Philip replied that it would be on our preferred option and everything to do  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

(Director of Governance) to consider the attached report.

The Director of Neighbourhoods introduced the quarter 4 outturn report for the Key Performance Indicators for 2015/16. The Committee noted that as part of the duty to secure continuous improvement, a range of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) relevant to the Council’s services and key objectives, are adopted each year by the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee. Performance against the KPIs was monitored on a quarterly basis by Management Board and Overview and Scrutiny to drive improvement in performance and ensure corrective action was taken where necessary.

In this case the quarterly measurements would start from the start of the financial, 1^st April.

A range of thirty-six (36) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for 2015/16 was adopted by the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee in March 2015. The KPIs were important to the improvement of the Council’s services, and comprise a combination of some former statutory indicators and locally determined performance measures. The overall position for all 36 KPIs at the end of the year was as follows:

(a)    27 (75%) indicators achieved target;

(b)    9 (25%) indicators did not achieve target; although

(c)    1 (3 %) of these KPIs performed within its tolerated amber margin.

Twelve of the Key Performance Indicators fell within the Neighbourhoods Select Committee’s areas of responsibility. The overall position with regard to the achievement of target performance at the end of the year for these indicators was as follows:

(a)     7 (58%) indicators achieved target;

(b)     5 (42% indicators did not achieve target; although

(c)     1 (8%) indicator performed within its tolerated amber margin. 

The committee went on to review each indicator that looked to be in trouble and to question any inconsistencies that they came across.

NEI001 – how much non-recycled waste was collected for every household in the district – Councillor Sartin asked what new ideas were coming forward to remedy this. She was told that officers had considered this that afternoon at the Waste Management Partnership Board, debating what was residual waste and what was fly-tipping. It may be that in the future fly-tipping may be stripped out. The Assistant Director, Technical, Mr Durrani said that we had adopted this as part of best practice, one lesson was to strip back the measurement and only measure what residents put in their non-recycling bin.

Councillor Bedford asked if there could be a centrally located collecting area for large items to help stop fly-tipping. Mr Durrani said that they could look at this. One problem was that once publicised it would become a de facto dumping ground and a fly-tipping point.

Councillor Bedford asked if there was a central map of where these tips occur and where we could set up covert cameras. Mr Durrani said that they were working with Biffa on this.

Councillor Bedford suggested that this Committee have a meeting on fly-tipping and have relevant officers come and talk to this problem. This was agreed by the committee.

AGREED: that a presentation be arranged on the problems  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

(Director of Governance) to consider the attached report.

The Director of Neighbourhoods introduced the report on the quarter 4 outturn position of the Corporate Plan Key Action Plan (2015/16). The Corporate Plan was the Council’s key strategic planning document, setting out its priorities over the five-year period from 2015/16 to 2019/20. The priorities or Corporate Aims are supported by Key Objectives, which provided a clear statement of the Council’s overall intentions for these five years.

The Corporate Plan Key Action Plan for 2015/16 was agreed by the Cabinet in March 2015. Progress in relation to individual actions and deliverables are reviewedby the Cabinet and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on a quarterly and outturn basis.

The Corporate Plan 2015-2020 was the Council’s highest level strategic document. It set the strategic direction for the authority for the five year lifetime of the Plan. It focused on a number of key areas that the Council needed to focus on during that time and helped to prioritise resources to provide quality services and value for money. These key areas are known as the Corporate Aims and are supported by a set of Key Objectives which represent the Council’s high-level initiatives and over-arching goals to achieve the Corporate Aims. The Key Objectives are in turn, delivered via an annual Key Action Plan.

There are 55 actions in the Key Action Plan 2015/16. At the end of the year:

·         36 (65%) of these actions had been achieved by year end; and

·         19 (35%) of these actions had not been achieved by year end.

20 actions fell within the areas of responsibility of the Neighbourhoods Select Committee. At the end of the year:

·         11 (55%) of these actions had been achieved; and

·         9 (45%) of these actions had not been achieved by year end. 

The Committee noted that:

·         The St John’s Road redevelopment scheme will have a report going to the July Cabinet meeting;

·         That a report on a development partner for North Weald Airfield went to the January 2016 cabinet meeting;

·         That an updating report on the Epping Forest Shopping Park will be going to the July cabinet meeting;

·         Councillor Sartin had received reports that the sales people for the delivery of the Essex Superfast Broadband Project had been using bullying tactics. She was told that there had been issues subsidy in the urban areas where they were getting some competition. This would be investigated;

·         Councillor Whitehouse asked when they could see the new Economic Development Plan for the District and was told that there would be a workshop for members in the near future;

·         That planning permission had been granted for playing fields for the new secondary school on the Ongar Campus site.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee reviewed the outturn position of the Corporate Plan Key Action Plan for 2015/16 in relation to its area of responsibility.

(Director of Neighbourhoods) to consider the attached report.

The report on the Councils Environmental Charter and objectives was introduced by the Environmental Co-ordinator, Liz Ainslie. In November 2015 the neighbourhood and Community services Select Committee had agreed that a draft environmental charter and action plan should be developed to replace the existing Climate Change Policy.  It was further agreed that it should be brought back to the Select Committee for comment and agreement.

The outcome of these discussions was considered at the Green Working Party (GWP) on 7 December when it was agreed that the charter and action plan should be modelled on the ‘Climate Local’ methodology.  This looks at various environmental commitments for a local authority and breaks them down into broad areas, such as Finance, Energy, the Natural Environment, etc.  Within each area, suggestions are made for environmental commitments and associated actions. These documents now follow the format of Climate Local methodology but have been tailored to EFDC requirements. 

The Environmental Charter is an overarching document to explain what we as EFDC (and the GWP) feel are our main commitments to the environment as the area leader. 

The ‘Commitments and Actions’ is a document to demonstrate ways in which we are fulfilling our Charter.  It was broken into three main headings with broad actions under each heading.  The broad actions will then be supported by specific actions from the GWP work plan.  Once actions have been completed they can be added to this document as a record of what has been achieved.  In this way the work plan can be the “working document” which changes; supporting the overall commitments and actions document.

Councillor Whitehouse asked about objective S.08, working with the local tourist board on sustainable travel to the local sites, and what we were doing about using buses. Ms Ainslie replied that nothing specific was being done about the buses, but they were asking the companies how they could influence or give feedback on how to make things more robust, such as telling people how to get to the tourist destinations by public transport.

Councillor Neville noted S.01 on sustainability campaigns and training; and asked if members could be invited to the training sessions? He was told that they could.

Councillor Bedford commented that when we were notified that a bus service was withdrawn, we should ask why. Mr Macnab noted that this really came under the County Council’s remit; but we could look at bus routes as a committee as part of our sustainability work. Ms Swan noted that the second recommendation of this report was to have an annual updating report on the Environmental Charter objectives and bus routes could be tackled there.

Councillor Neville noted the objective on seeking the view of residents on electric charging points, but wondered where this electricity was coming from. Ms Ainslie replied that they had investigated charging points because a resident had asked them to. Officers could trial a rapid charge point here, with a one hour charge time, which would have to be paid for.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(Director of Neighbourhoods) To consider the attached report.

The Committee received a late report on the ECC consultation on the M11 junction 7A (and widening of Gilden Way). They noted that Essex County Council was currently consulting on the provision and design of a new junction 7A on the M11, and the related widening of Gilden Way. The consultation was open until 6^th July 2016. This consultation followed several years of work by the County Council in assessing various options to improve congestion, and also in assessing possibilities for junction 7A design and location. A number of exhibitions would be going around the district. 

The County Council’s own strategic options appraisal had shown that a new junction 7A was the best solution to overcome problems on the transport network in the area, particularly in and around Harlow. It was felt that this would not only benefit the residents, workers and visitors of Harlow, but also those of neighbouring areas such as Epping Forest District, as traffic congestion relating to accessing and exiting the M11, had long been a problem in the local area.

The proposal was for the new junction 7A to sit between junctions 7 (Harlow) and 8 (Bishop's Stortford), to the north east of Harlow town, on land within Epping Forest District. Specifically, the western half of the junction and the access roads into Harlow would sit within Lower Sheering ward, and the eastern half of the junction would sit just within Hastingwood, Matching and Sheering Village ward.

It was noted that this was being promoted by local authorities as it was not yet in the Highways England budget. The project also creates a spur going nowhere, this was to future proof the scheme but officers were unconvinced about this spur on the consultation. EFDC Members have previously raised concerns over the timing of the ‘future-proofing’ spur and roundabout which form part of Essex County Council’s proposals. It was suggested that the Council included these concerns in its response, suggesting to Essex County Council that the phasing of delivery for these elements would need to be determined by the individual Districts’ Local Plans, which were not yet available.

Councillor Waller, EFDC’s Safer Greener and Transport Portfolio Holder, being unable to attend the meeting, sent in the following comments:

“The so-called ‘future-proofing’ roundabout, which is a prominent feature on the plan, has been added at a late stage to reassure residents of Old Harlow who have been pressing for a northern by-pass of Harlow to relieve traffic on Gilden Way, that one day that by-pass may be built.  Councillor Rodney Bass, the ECC Portfolio Holder, has come under pressure from those residents, but in reality ECC’s consultation document admits that such a by-pass may only be built in 20 years time or more, and currently the economic case for it is untenable.  Because such a by-pass would have to be constructed on stilts crossing the Stort valley, it would be a very prominent feature in the landscape, quite close to Lower Sheering, and will be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To note the scheduled future meetings. They are:

13^th September 2016;

15^th November 2016;

24^th January 2017; and

21^st March.

The Committee noted the dates for their future meetings.