Decision details

1. To note the key findings of the Streets and Open Spaces service review; and
2. To approve the proposed future service vision and development strategy (2017-21) for Streets and Open Spaces

Matter for Decision

The Streets and Open Spaces (S&OS) review identified the service enjoyed continuing high residents’ satisfaction rates and generally delivered a range of high quality frontline services.  However, the review also identified a number of areas where the service needed to improve.  S&OS would need to respond to these issues in order to make the service fit for purpose and resilient for the future; and be able to respond to the ongoing financial and growth challenges and opportunities, which the city faces. 

 

As the Council’s largest frontline service, the review included the need for S&OS to make a £600K net revenue budget reduction by 2021, as a contribution towards the wider corporate savings target the Council needs to make as a result of the ongoing reductions in Central Government grant funding.

 

In response to the review findings, S&OS proposed to pursue a service development strategy, which delivered against the corporate vision – “One Cambridge: Fair for All” and the following specified corporate objectives.

 

The proposed strategy would be delivered through an implementation plan, which would set out a programme of proposed projects and activities, and associated capital and revenue budgetary implications. Subject to the wider strategy being approved at Committee, the proposed implementation plan would be researched and developed and then presented to a future committee meeting(s) for consideration and approval.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Streets & Open Spaces

       i.          Noted the key findings of the Streets and Open Spaces service review.

     ii.          Approved the proposed future service vision and development strategy (2017-21) for Streets and Open Spaces.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Head of Environmental Services.

 

Councillor Austin asked for the minutes to show her concern regarding the need for the S&OS Service to make a £600,000 net revenue budget reduction by 2021. She asked for clarification on why this needed to happen.

 

Opposition Councillors expressed concern about the damage done to Mid Summer Common and Jesus Green after events eg Mid Summer Fair. Revenue from events had to be balanced against maintenance costs. The Strategic Director undertook to discuss issues including parking restrictions outside of committee.

 

The Head of Environmental Services said the following in response to Members’ questions:

       i.          The S&OS review was led by the principle of “what’s best for the service”.

     ii.          The S&OS service shape/structure had to be fit for purpose to respond to demands by the city within resources available. The S&OS Strategy set out how to do this eg through the use of technology.

   iii.          Area Committees received environmental data reports to give information about the public realm and general street cleanliness. Intelligence was sought at Area Committees on ‘hot spots’ where action needed to be taken. As a result of feedback in the Opposition Councillor briefing, the intention was to take a breakdown of local performance data to Area Committees.

   iv.          The reference in the Officer’s report that cleansing of the city centre may happen at the detriment of outlying areas reflected a snapshot in time. It was being investigated what the data actually showed. The city centre needed a lot of resource due to high service demand. A good service was also given to city outskirts. The S&OS Strategy should lead to prioritisation and smarter working to identify where to allocate resources.

    v.          Management plans were in place to use resources appropriately eg types of plants to use in areas so they were lower maintenance.

   vi.          Management were careful to ensure staff were able to input into the process at the start of the S&OS review. Staff supported the strategy, lots of opportunities to engage had been taken up. Staff would be involved in the delivery of the implementation plan.

 vii.          Management plans covered the need to balance revenue from events against maintenance costs. An events review in 2017 would also cover the issue. Event organisers were required to repair or pay for repairs to open spaces, to put areas back into their pre-event condition.

 

The Strategic Director said the S&OS Strategic Review would look at how to deliver services in future. There would be a separate Event Review. These would look at the overall headline/strategic level of detail, not at individual events. Councillors and Officers could discuss details about individual open spaces outside of committee.

 

The Executive Councillor said that events on green spaces would continue to go ahead. Events were temporary and generated sufficient benefit to mitigate any damage that needed repair.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.