Agenda and minutes

This meeting is to be webcast. Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking. The Chairman will read the following announcement:

“The Chairman would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live to the internet (or filmed) and will be capable of repeated viewing (or another use by such third parties).

If you are seated in the lower public seating area it is likely that the recording cameras will capture your image and this will result in the possibility that your image will become part of the broadcast.

This may infringe your human and data protection rights and if you wish to avoid this you should move to the upper public gallery.”

The Chairman made a short address to remind everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the internet, and would be capable of repeated viewing, which could infringe their human and data protection rights.

To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The following substitutions were reported:

Cllr H Kane was substituting for Cllr S Heather.

To declare interests in any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest pursuant to the Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct.

To agree the notes of the meeting of the Select Committee held on 22 June 2021.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 22 June 2021 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference and work programme for this select committee. Members are invited at each meeting to review both documents.

The Select Committee noted the terms of reference and work programme.

To consider the proposed revision of the Stronger Place Select Committee’s Terms of Reference.

Cllr Lion advised that the proposed revised Terms of Reference (ToR) had been drafted in response to Member comments made in writing and at the meeting of the Stronger Place Select Committee on 22 June 2021. These had been presented to Overview & Scrutiny Chairmen & Vice-Chairmen on 22 July 2021, who commented that the revision was too detailed and noted that Overview and Scrutiny would need to approve any changes to the Terms of Reference.

The Stronger Place Select Committee:

·         commended the revisions and the clarity and context that proposed ToR provided.

·         noted that there needed to be some flexibility within the ToR.

·         noted that some of the infrastructure and sustainability requirements detailed in the ToR would subject to the Local Plan.

·         suggested that presentations from external parties were an essential element of the role of the Select Committee as this would provide information and awareness and allow the committee to comment and influence when appropriate.

·         requested that the proposed ToR be presented to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

·         suggested the following items for inclusion in the work programme; the consultation on climate change, leisure, litter across the district, planning processes, enforcement and waste management.

·         discussed if Cabinet decisions should be scrutinised of if scrutiny should be earlier to influence decisions. A preference was noted for early scrutiny, when possible.

Members commented that the revised ToR provided clarity that could be beneficial for the other Select Committees and  Cabinet. and requested that this be taken to the next Joint Chairs meeting for consideration by the other Select Committees.

Resolved:

The Select Committee agreed that, pending minor revisions, the proposed terms of reference should be commended to Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their comment and approval, and be and be presented at the next meeting of this Select Committee.

The work programme would be developed and prioritised. 

To consider the attached report regarding the Branding of the Ground Floor of the Civic Offices.

Rob Pavey, Customer Services Director, outlined the proposed designs and names for the re-branding of the ground floor of the Civic Offices to the Select Committee. This reflected the new community and collaborative purpose of the space and promoted the area as a new destination where EFDC services would work collaboratively with partners to provide wraparound solutions for residents and wider community activity. He emphasised that this was not a proposal to rename the Civic Offices and was for the ground floor of the building. The refurbishment of the Civic Offices had provided an opportunity to review how the building was used, the building had a reduced footprint for EFDC staff and the top floor was occupied on a commercial basis. He described the areas of the ground floor and the flow through these areas and suggested the proximity and integration of the ground floor activity lent itself to a common brand.

It was acknowledged that there was some subjectivity and personal preference in all branding exercises, members had been involved in the iterative design proves carried out over the summer and two options were presented: ‘The Civic Hub’ and ‘The Civic’. Partners had been consulted and feedback on a common brand had been positively received. Signage was needed to help all parties signpost services and improve the visitor experience. The signage would have the same coloured floor markings, as floor spots to act as path markers to assist the journey through the building.

Learning outcomes had been noted from the process which could have had a clearer design brief and better engagement. The costs detailed in the report were maximum costs and included the design, production and installation though the space and the floor markings. The final design was a representation of collaboration and people working together and the name options for consideration were ‘The Hub’ or ‘The Civic Hub’

Members of the Select Committee

• Commented that: residents had raised concerns on the cost of the exercise, acknowledged that rebranding could be expensive and difficult and there had been some level of reassurance that the costs included production and installation costs.

• Acknowledged that there could be a personal preference around the rebranding and as this was subjective there would always be some differences of opinion. 

• Discussed the potential names  and suggested that ‘Civic’ related to a city, was not a noun and therefore ‘The Civic’ was an anomaly; suggested that ‘Hub’ was more suitable term for an airport; that Forest, or Epping Forest should be included in the name and that Community Hub or Centre would be more suitable, as civic represented ‘The Council’.   It was noted that a Community Hub, run by a third party,  already existed in Loughton.   R Pavey advised that the names had been put forward as part of the design brief after an iterative  process with some members and senior management, to revisit would add time and money to the project, the term ‘hub’  was widely used across the county to describe shared spaces  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

To note that future meetings of the Select Committee will be held on 13 January 2022.

The date of the next meeting was noted as the 13 January 2022.