Issue - meetings

Councillors will review the projects received noting that the decisions will be taken by the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces in January 2023.

 The Committee received a report from the Project Leader regarding the Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP). The report outlined the newly submitted schemes for 2022/23.

Members were reminded that following requests and queries from members across various areas, a spreadsheet had been sent in advance of the meeting to assist in prioritising local area Environmental Improvement Programme project requests.

After publication of the EIP paper, Officers had an opportunity to consider these projects in more detail with input from a broader officer group, with the outcome that some of the ratings had altered slightly from those published which could be viewed at the link below:

EIP Committee Priorities

It was noted that the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and Community Development would ultimately make the decision on which environmental improvement projects would be taken forward.

In response to Members’ questions the Programme Leader (John Richards) said the following:

      i.         It was important to focus on alternative funding streams which might strengthen certain programme of works; EIP funding could then be moved to other projects.

    ii.         There had been requests for play equipment which was not eligible for EIP funding and might be more appropriately funded through S106 funding.

   iii.         The street tree canopy project funded through the EU was nearing conclusion though it was intended that other sources of funding might be available in the future and therefore tree related projects within the EIP bids might be more appropriately funded through the any continued tree canopy programme.

  iv.         There is a capital budget for street trees spread over four years. The first year has been delivered and officers have been working with the Council’s Arboricultural Team to identify areas / streets in the city which would be benefit from additional tree planting.

    v.         The majority of the projects placed for the Committee’s consideration were deliverable but not all in one year.

  vi.         Noted members strong support for the tree protection project at the end of the Skaters Meadow; replacing the use of old telegraphs poles with deadwood of tree trunks and branches to improve biodiversity. Project rated lower as external stakeholders would have to give their agreement regarding works because of the uncertainties in land ownership. 

 vii.         Programme Leader had not been aware of the preliminary work that had been undertaken with officers, businesses, and an architect regarding the bins on Christ Pieces and that match funding also applied to this project.

viii.         A suitable/agreeable position for the notice boards in each ward would have to be found and then permission sought to install, it was unclear who would be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of information in the boards, and this was essential to establish before any implementation.

  ix.         For the Midsummer Common path scheme, it was felt that signage would be beneficial to remind the public that the pathways were shared between pedestrians and cyclists. This project is considered a pilot scheme.

    x.         Would question whether the issue of parking on the Woodlark Estate was caused by residents or commuters from outside the area, however the local councillor confirmed that they were largely service vehicles for deliveries, tradesmen etc.

  xi.         . The views of residents is split, some believe that the verges should be only be restored to grass and others are supportive of wildflower planting to deter parking. 

 xii.         Noted the comment that the priority for Newham Ward should be Skaters Meadows over Lammas Land and the Community Notice Boards which had been suggested by residents.

xiii.         Noted the statement that the Midsummer Common paths had been suggested by residents.

xiv.         Noted the comment that the Norwich Street could be referred to as a strategic EIP  project.

xv.         Noted the suggestion that (WC14) Lammas Land is incorporated in the Lammas Land Management Plan.

xvi.         Noted that all greens rated projects should be considered and the noticeboards (WC9) funded, if possible, through reserve or strategic EIP funding.  That the green/amber projects WC2 Biodiversity in Woodlark area, WC13 bins on Gough Way and WC16 Christ’s Pieces provision for bin improvements are also considered priority projects for funding.     

The Project Officer stated that the comments made by the Committee regarding the order of projects would be considered and re-proposed to committee members for final comment before reporting to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and Community Development for their final decision.  Approved Projects would be taken forward when resources allow, likely during 2023, subject to delivery resource available and local consultation.