Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Kightley and Councillor Saunders took the Chair. Councillor Brierley was present as the alternate. 

Members are asked to declare at this stage any interests that they may have in an item shown on this agenda. If any member of the Committee is unsure whether or not they should declare an interest on a particular matter, they should seek advice from the Head of Legal Services before the meeting.

Councillor	Item	Interest
Saunders	13/16/ENV	Personal: Member of Cambridge Past, Present and Future
Reiner	13/16/ENV	Personal: Members of Cambridge Past Present and Future
Reid	13/16/ENV	Personal: Member of Cambridge Past Present and Future. Personal and Prejudicial: Co-founder of Close the Door. Left the room for the consideration of this item.

 

Please see information at the end of the agenda

There were no public questions. 

Matter for Decision:  

The Officer’s report set out the overall base revenue and capital budget position for the Environmental & Waste Services Portfolio. The report compared the proposed 2012/13 Revised Budget to the budget as at September 2012 and details the budget proposals for 2013/14 and 2014/15.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

Review of Charges

              i.      Approve the proposed charges for this portfolio’s services and facilities, as shown in Appendix B1 to the Officer’s report.

            ii.      Request that the proposed charges for this portfolio’s services and facilities, as shown in Appendix B2 to the officer’s report, are  submitted to Council for approval.

 

Revenue Budgets

          iii.      Approve, with any amendments, the current year funding requests and savings, (shown in Appendix A of the Officer’s report) and the resulting revised revenue budgets for 2012/13 (shown in Section 3, Table 1 of the Officer’s report) for submission to the Executive.

         iv.      Agree proposals for revenue savings and unavoidable bids, as set out in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.

           v.      Agree proposals for bids from external or existing funding, as set out in Appendix D of the Officer’s report.

         vi.      Agree proposals for Priority Policy Fund (PPF) bids, as set out in Appendix E of the Officer’s report.

       vii.      Approve the budget proposals for 2013/14 as shown in Table 2 of the Officer’s report, for submission to the Executive.

 

Capital

     viii.      Seek approval from the Executive to carry forward resources from 2012/13, as detailed in Appendix G of the Officer’s report, to fund re-phased capital spending.

         ix.      Approve capital bids, as identified in Appendix H of the Officer’s report, for submission to the Executive for inclusion in the Capital & Revenue Projects Plan or addition to the Hold List, as indicated.

           x.      Approve the remit and establishment of a capital programme for the purchase of bins for new developments as detailed in paragraph 3.2 of the Officer’s report, for submission to the Executive.

         xi.      Delegate the carrying out and completion of the procurement for the provision of wheeled bins for the use in communal waste and recycling facilities for flats and individual premises for new developments to the Director of Environment, subject to the receipt of funding from developers. This delegation is intended to cover the current programme plus future years’ procurement.

       xii.      Confirm that there are no items covered by this portfolio to add to the Council’s Hold List, for submission to the Executive.

     xiii.      Approve the following project appraisals as detailed in Appendix K of the Officer’s report:

a.    Bins for New Developments

b.    In Cab Technology – Full Roll Out

c.    Vehicle Replacement Programme 2013/14

     xiv.      Approve the current Capital & Revenue Projects Plan, as detailed in Appendix J of the Officer’s report, to be updated for any amendments detailed in (h), (i), (j), (k), (l) and (m) above.

 

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 Principal Accountant (Services) regarding overall base revenue and capital budget position for the Environmental & Waste Services Portfolio.

 

Concerns were raised about the PPF (Priority Policy Funding) detailed in Appendix D of the Officer’s report regarding the Rapid Response Team. How would the public know this service was available? Why would it be responsive rather than pro active? Why was if needed as the public would expect a good service at all times? How would it link with the current ranger arrangements?

 

The Head of Streets and Open Spaces responded. The goal was to achieve the best results within the resources available. The new service would work closely with the rangers and there was a potential to share equipment. Rangers could call on the Rapid Response Service if required. The new service would pick up cyclical jobs and when called to an area, would have the flexibility to pick up any other outstanding tasks in that area. There would be no duplication or conflict with the CBid initiative.

 

Members suggested that the service would need careful marketing and would need to embrace new technologies. The officer confirmed that, in conjunction with the Head of Customer Services, new technologies and alternative ways of communicating with customers were being explored. 

 

Councillor Herbert expressed concerns that the recategorisation of educational waste could result in a reduction of revenue income. The Head of Refuse and Environment confirmed that this was a risk and had been added to the risk register. The commercial recycling service would be closely monitored and letters had been sent to all affected premises.

 

In response to members’ questions the Head of Refuse and Environment confirmed the following regarding the appendices of the Officer’s report:

 

              i.      The drop in funding noted in Appendix F was the result of an unsuccessful DCLG bid.

            ii.      Environmental Protection and Enforcement budget allocation groupings had been realigned due to efficiency measures and staffing restructures. There was no net loss.

          iii.      Appendix K(i) bins for new developments, related only to new planning applications. Additional funding had been awarded previously for existing flats and improved recycling opportunities had been rolled out to some existing blocks of flats.

         iv.      The final report on waste compositions was expected shortly and this would direct future recycling work.

           v.      The service was actively engaged with new technologies and was considering engagement methods, such as twitter, to improve communication with younger people.

         vi.      Appendix K(ii) ‘In Cab Technology’, the pilot project had not yet started and further information would be reported at a later date.

 

The Committee resolved by 4 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

Not applicable. 

Matter for Decision:  

The following report set out the overall base revenue and capital budget position for the Planning and Climate Change Portfolio. The report compared the proposed 2012/13 Revised Budget to the budget as at September 2012 and detailed the budget proposals for 2013/14 and 2014/15.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

Review of Charges

              i.      Approve the proposed charges for this portfolio’s services and activities, as shown in Appendix B of the Officer’s report.

 

Revenue Budgets

            ii.      Approve, with any amendments, the current year funding requests and savings, (shown in Appendix A of the Officer’s report) and the resulting revised revenue budgets for 2012/13 (shown in Section 3 of the Officer’s report, Table 1) for submission to the Executive.

          iii.      Agree proposals for revenue savings and unavoidable bids, as set out in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.

         iv.      Agree proposals for bids from external or existing funding, as set out in Appendix D of the Officer’s report.

           v.      Agree proposals for Priority Policy Fund (PPF) bids, as set out in Appendix E of the Officer’s report.

         vi.      Approve the budget proposals for 2013/14 as shown in Section 3 of the Officer’s report, Table 2, for submission to the Executive.

 

Capital

       vii.      Seek approval from the Executive to carry forward resources from 2012/13, as detailed in Appendix G of the Officer’s report, to fund re-phased capital spending.

     viii.      Confirm deletion of PR019 Car Parks Infrastructure and Equipment Replacement Programme from the Capital Plan (see 3.19).

         ix.      Approve further funding of £26,000 to cover additional costs associated with capital project SC557 Grand Arcade Annex Car Park - Drainage Gulleys, to be met from the Car Parks Structural Repairs and Renewal fund.

           x.      Approve capital bids, as identified in Appendix H of the Officer’s report, for submission to the Executive for inclusion in the Capital & Revenue Projects Plan or addition to the Hold List, as indicated.

         xi.      Confirm that there are no items covered by this portfolio to add to the Council’s Hold List, for submission to the Executive.

       xii.      Approve the current Capital & Revenue Projects Plan, as detailed in Appendix J of the Officer’s report, to be updated for any amendments detailed in (g), (h) (i) and (j) above.

 

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 Principal Accountant (Services) regarding the overall base revenue and capital budget position for the Planning and Climate Change Portfolio. He table amendments to recommendations (h) and (i) to read as follows (changes in bold):

 

(h) Seek approval from the Executive Councillor to remove Confirm deletion of PR019 Car Parks Infrastructure and Equipment Replacement Programme from the Capital Plan (see 3.19).

(i)    Seek approval from the Executive Councillor for Approve further funding of £26,000 to cover additional costs associated with capital project SC557 Grand Arcade Annex Car Park - Drainage Gulleys, to be met from the Car Parks Structural Repairs and Renewal fund.

 

Councillor Marchant-Daisley questioned underachievement against predicted income of both planning fees and car parking receipts and further questioned the expected costs of delaying the Park Street Car Park improvements.

 

The Head of Planning stated that planning fees forecasts were based on developer estimates. The Director of Environment added clarity by confirming that a handful of large projects had been delayed by the market downturn.

 

Councillor Herbert questioned when, if ever, the money would arrive. He also questioned the activity of staff that had been employed using the New Homes Bonus funding. Officers confirmed that there were a large number of applications in the pipeline and assured members that staff had been working hard. It was hoped that the planned developments would be achieved over the next two years.

 

The Head of Specialist Services stated that the variation in car park income was only 3 to 4 per cent of turnover. In addition, car parking fees had been raised at less that the rate of inflation. He stated that the delays to Park Street were unavoidable, as no decision had been made on the long-term future of the car park. Councillor Ward clarified that the project was not delayed but that the spend had been rephased.

 

Councillor Herbert questioned the baseline figures for the car park which appear to have risen from the original £3.4m costing, given the need to undertake urgent works ahead of the main programme

In addition he asked if the figures include the £300,000 shortfall from the current budget. The Head of Specialist Services confirmed that this had been taken into account. Councillor Ward stated that the original estimate had been based on a like for like provision which was unlikely to be the end project. The Director of Environment confirmed that technical work on the ground conditions was on-going. However, while there would be financial consequences to the rephrasing, this gave a more realistic timeframe for delivering the project.

 

The Committee resolved by 4 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

Not applicable. 

Matter for Decision:  

 

Green Deal is the Governments new energy efficiency policy, launched in October 2012. It is a fully accredited route for householders and property owners to have their properties and energy use behaviour assessed and for key measures to improve energy efficiency to be identified, financed and installed. The legislation stipulates that key players, involved at all relevant stages will be rigorously assessed and certified by appropriate bodies to provide maximum confidence in the process.

 

The Executive Councillor is asked to approve the establishment of a partnership of the Cambridgeshire Districts to deliver the Green Deal work proposal, subject to detailed approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Authorities involved at Public Service Board.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

                    i.      To approve the establishment of a partnership of the Cambridgeshire Districts and Cambridgeshire County Council to deliver the Green Deal work proposal, subject to detailed approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Authorities involved at Public Service Board;

 

                  ii.      To approve the conduct of a procurement exercise and award of contract(s) to one or more Green Deal commercial providers to be let on a County wide basis and in collaboration with Cambridgeshire Local Authorities.

 

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 Environmental Quality and Growth Manager  regarding the Green Deal.

 

The Officer made the following points in response to members’ questions.

                i.      The potential that up front fees would put off potential customers had been considered. The Partnership would consider a variety of models offered by providers and take up the most attractive based on a number of considerations. The onus would be on the providers to find a solution for up front costs.

              ii.      Training community groups to carry out the initial assessment might offer a solution.

            iii.      The Partnership would take into account the opportunities for the City of Cambridge to include a non-domestic properties. This is something that will be considered, however, the current guidance concentrated on domestic properties.

           iv.      Green Deal will be attractive to landlords, as costs would be recovered from the tenant via energy costs.

             v.      The Green Deal potential locally is not as strong as some parts of the country and there will be a need to promote what the council could offer in order to attract providers and to promote competition. If no provider could be found there would be little ‘ECO’ money for Cambridge.

 

Members were concerned that recent press report suggested that to-date the scheme had achieved very little nationally. It was suggested that marketing the Green Deal would be key. The Environmental Quality and Growth Manager  reminded members of a recent successful DECC bid for a pilot project. This would deliver over 200 home assessments over Cambridgeshire and form the evidence base to produce some locally focussed promotional materials. This activity would help to raise public awareness.

 

Concerns were raised that the scheme would be overly complicated. The Officer agreed that it was complicated.

 

Members discussed the staffing implications and were assured that while an initial additional half time post was needed to establish the scheme, it was not envisaged that this need would continue once the scheme was up and running.

 

Councillor Saunders proposed an amendment to the second recommendation to add clarity. Additional wording in bold:

 

To approve the establishment of a partnership of the Cambridgeshire Districts and Cambridgeshire County Council to deliver the Green Deal work proposal, subject to detailed approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Authorities involved at Public Service Board;

 

The Committee resolved unanimously to endorse the amended recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

Not applicable. 

Matter for Decision:  

This report detailed applications from voluntary and not for profit organisations for 2013-14 Sustainable City Grant funding and made recommendations for funding.

 

The Council currently supports two countywide environmental partnerships through sustainability partnership funding from the Strategy & Partnerships base budget (the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership and the Cambridgeshire Travel for Work Partnership).  In January 2011 Environment Scrutiny Committee agreed to reduce the funding awarded to the Travel for Work Partnership (TfW) to bring it in line with awards made by other contributing local authorities.

 

The Committee also agreed in 2011 to review funding of both partnerships beyond 2012/13.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

              i.      To approve the recommendations for Sustainable City Grants to voluntary and not-for-profit organisations in 2013-14 as set out in Section 3.6 of this report, subject to confirmation of the Council’s 2013-14 budget in February 2013 and, in some cases, to the provision of further information from applicants.

 

            ii.      To approve the continued funding of the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership and the Cambridgeshire Travel for Work Partnership at their current levels for the next three financial years (2013/14, 2014/15, and 2015/16), subject to satisfactory annual evaluation reports. 

 

          iii.      Funding of these partnerships beyond 2015/16 will be reviewed in 2015.

 

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 Strategy and Partnership Manager regarding the Sustainable City Grants 2013-14.

 

Concerns were raised about the grants process and if it might be more appropriate for such grant to be considered along with community grants. Members stated that, while the sums of money in the grants were small, they felt uneasy making decisions with out the full information.  Concerns were raised about the results and value for money achieved. In future members would like to see more feedback from previous grant recipients.

 

The Sustainability Officer confirmed that her team do keep detailed histories of previous grant recipients. Nine criterions, with specific outcomes and targets were part of the application process. Councillor Ward stated that in the past, members of all parties had reviewed the grants pre committee and he would be happy for this to happen in future.

 

Members questioned why a number of applicants had not received the full amount they had requested. The Officer confirmed that such decisions were based on value for money and merit. Smaller amounts to a larger number of organisation was favoured as the award of a Cambridge City Council grant opened door for applicants to apply to other grant funding bodies.

 

The Committee resolved by unanimously to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

Not applicable.