Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED:  That all items of business be considered in public. 

Consideration was given to the budget proposals for the Council's Residents Services.  Members were advised that £10m of savings were proposed for Hillingdon in 2015/2016, approximately £3½m of which related to the services covered within this Committee's remit.  Included in these proposals were savings from staffing restructures in support functions and middle management, which continued the trend from previous years.  It was anticipated that £110k of savings would be achieved through reviews of the Fleet Management operation and further ICT rationalisation. 

It was noted that proposals in relation to the outcome of zero-based reviews across the group were expected to contribute £375k towards delivery of the savings target, while the budgetary impact of West London Waste Authority's closure of the Victoria Road Civic Amenity site was expected to release £406k.  Members were advised that there had been no additional costs for the provision of the service in Harefield as a result of this closure and that there had been an increase in the income received from trade waste.  However, there had been a slight increase in the cost of disposal from this site and more vehicles had travelled through Harefield as a result. 

In addition to preferential rates for residents, the Council had frozen almost all Fees and Charges for residents during 2013/14 and 2014/15, with modest increases proposed for a small number of charges in 2015/16.  Where increases were recommended, the cost recovery principle had been considered and charges had been benchmarked against those of neighbouring authorities and shown to remain competitive.

Growth of £711k for the Residents Services Group had been included in the draft budget for consultation, based on Cabinet’s known expenditure commitments.  Of this £711k:

·         £440k had been provided to support a continuation of the Ward Budget Scheme, providing a sum of £22,000 for investment in each ward;

·         an additional £62k growth to fund the Police Tasking Team was included in the budget, representing the full year effect of monies included in the 2014/15 budget and bringing this funding to £134k per annum;

·         £130k Priority Growth was included in the budget to provide increased investment in tackling Rogue Landlords and Beds in Sheds across the Borough; and

·         in order to ensure that the benefits of recent investment in the Ruislip Lido site were maximised, £24k was being earmarked to fund additional staffing in the peak season.

This draft capital programme for 2015/2016 included a number of proposed new schemes totalling £15,951k:

·         Battle of Britain Bunker, a Heritage Civic Pride project - A restoration project on the former RAF Uxbridge Site.  Plans included the replacement of a building near the Bunker known as the ASU building with potential for it to act as a visitor centre, the overall project was estimated to cost in the region of £4,850k with a target completion date of September 2015;

·         Highways Structural Works & Pavements Priority Growth - £3,000k additional investment was included in this draft budget to continue the Council's programme of activity in these areas;

·         Cedars & Grainges Car Park Improvements  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Members were advised that the provisions in the Anti Social Behaviour Policing and Crime Act 2014 relating to Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) came into effect on 20 October 2014.  PSPOs would cover all major issues contained within local byelaws and would be used instead of Controlled Drinking Zones (CDZs) which would become obsolete in October 2017.  It was proposed that two PSPOs be adopted in Hillingdon: one to cover parks and open spaces and the other to cover all land to which the public had access.  Following consideration of the proposals by the Committee and the Cabinet Member, consultation would be undertaken with residents.

Mr Ed Shayor, the Council's Senior Manager - Community Safety, advised that the proposed PSPOs would enable enforcement officers to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) for things like spitting or feeding pigeons inappropriately.  However, the Committee was assured that it would not prevent people from gathering in a public space for a discussion. 

It was noted that the Council would advertise the existence of a PSPO in appropriate places.  In addition, local Orders could be introduced following local consultation and consideration could be given to the format of the signage used to advertise those PSPOs that were put in place, e.g., pictorial.  Members were advised that, although 'Controlled Drinking Zones' was the terminology used by most local authorities, this was not the wording used in the relevant legislation and had been locally adopted.  As such, the existing signage could be kept where the PSPOs covering the public consumption of alcohol were implemented.  It was anticipated that, as residents had become accustomed to this terminology, it would reduce any confusion that new signs might cause. 

Mr Shaylor noted that the proposals for PSPOs would be publicised in Hillingdon People and on the Council's website.  It was suggested that consideration be given to advertising the existence of PSPOs on the back of the "lollipop signs" used by JCDecaux in appropriate places.  Mr Shaylor would liaise with the Head of Communications to see if this suggestion could be taken forward. 

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.   

Consideration was given to the Annual Safety at Sport Grounds report and to the inspection levels suggested therein.  Although none of the sports grounds mentioned in the report were 'designated' (so were not subject to a Safety Certificate), Members were assured that officers would routinely visit the grounds and make public safety recommendations when large matches (2-3,000 attendees) were planned - there were usually only 2-3 of this size event held each year.  It was suggested that, to make this clearer in the procedures, the wording be amended to replace "possible" with "necessary", e.g., "whenever necessary, an officer from the Licensing Service attends...".  Furthermore, it was suggested that clubs be routinely asked to contact local residents well in advance of events so that these residents were able to plan their movements accordingly. 

Members were advised that each club nominated a named safety officer who would contact the Council if assistance was required.  The Council would then bring the Safety Advisory Group (SAG) together with the club and make public safety recommendations as necessary.  If there was any concern that a club was not putting enough measures in place to protect the public, a prohibition notice could be served. 

It was noted that events such as 20/20 cricket matches and the auto show were held at venues where there was no fixed accommodation for spectators and, as such, these venues did not fall under the legislation.  However, as these events attracted a large number of spectators, the SAG assessed the safety provisions on an ad hoc basis. 

RESOLVED:  That:

1.    the word "possible" be replaced with "necessary" in the procedures; and   

2.    the report be noted. 

Consideration was given to the draft final report in relation to the major review into diversifying the Street Champions initiative.  Although in excess of 4,400 residents had engaged in the Street Champions initiative since its inception in 2006, it was acknowledged that there were currently only 137 who had made 11 or more reports in the last two years.  The initiative had reached its peak between 2006 and 2008 but engagement had subsequently reduced over time.  Members were advised that some Street Champions had inadvertently registered for the initiative without realising whilst others had become disillusioned by the lack of feedback received following a report that they had made. 

Concern was expressed that the inclusion of Members in all reports made by Street Champions would result in Councillors receiving emails in relation to more routine issues, for example, requests for recycling bags.  As such, it was agreed that recommendation 4 in the report be deleted.  As an alternative, it was suggested that a recommendation be included for the provision of a quarterly overview report tailored to each ward that showed the top 10 issues reported by Street Champions within each Ward for that quarter.  This information would be summarised as the top 5 environmental issues and the top 5 other service issues.  This would ensure that Members had an overarching view of the issues being reported in their Ward.  

It was suggested that, with regard to contacting Street Champions to thank them for their service and asking that they confirm that they would like to continue in this role, officers be mindful of the wording included in both the letter and the questionnaire (these could also be set up for online completion).  Subject to the recommendation being agreed by Cabinet, the Committee asked officers to ensure that the letter include information about the role of Street Champions and what this would entail.  It was suggested that the questionnaire should:

·         not duplicate the information contained within the letter (which should be succinct);

·         seek to identify the issues of most concern to Street Champions;

·         establish the availability of Street Champions for meetings and the purpose of these meetings;

·         include a question at the start to establish whether the individual wanted to remain as a Street Champion;

·         use accessible language; and

·         not put too much of a burden on the volunteers, e.g., they could have as much or as little access to their local Ward Councillors as they wanted.

Members were advised that a follow up letter would be sent out to those Street Champions who had not responded to the first letter.  This letter would advise that, if they hadn't responded by a certain date, the Council would assume that they wanted to deregister from the scheme. 

RESOLVED:  That the Democratic Services Manager, in consultation with the Chairman and the Labour Lead, make the amendments to the final report prior to consideration by Cabinet at its meeting on 12 February 2015. 

Consideration was given to the draft scoping report for a review of the cleaning and maintenance schedule for Hillingdon's footpaths and bridleways.  It was clarified that a footpath was a public right of way and did not include pavements outside houses.  However, Members requested that the scope be extended to include alleyways. 

It was suggested that an equestrian representative be added to the list of possible invitees for the single witness session being held on 25 February 2015.  Members also suggested inviting local residents from the vicinity of Frankie's Alley or Haste Hill where cleaning and maintenance issues were prevalent. 

As the review would comprise one witness session, Members were asked to ensure that they forwarded any questions to Democratic Services in advance of the meeting. 

RESOLVED:  That the scoping report be agreed. 

RESOLVED:  That the Forward Plan be noted.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the Residents' and Environmental Services Policy Overview Committee held on 13 November 2014 be agreed as a correct record.

At a previous meeting, Mr Paul Richards had agreed to investigate the possibility of investing in machinery that would break up the thick heavy clay extracted from the ground when digging graves so that it could be mixed with other material and reused.  Mr Richards advised that the machinery commercially available was not able to cope with the material being extracted and just clogged it up.  As such, the cemetery would continue to purchase top soil to fill the voids and pay to dispose of the material that had been extracted. 

Members were asked to identify potential review topics for 2015/2016.

RESOLVED:  That the Work Programme be noted.