Venue: Civic Offices, St Nicholas Way, Sutton SM1 1EA
Contact: Angela Guest, Committee Manager. tel: 020 8770 5122 Email: email@example.com
BRENDON HILLS - EXECUTIVE HEAD OF COMMISSIONING
The Chair welcomed Brendon Hills and congratulated him on his recent appointment as Executive Head of Commissioning.
Minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2013.
The Minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2013 were approved as a correct record, and signed by the Chair. In approving the Minutes the Committee noted that the draft Sustainable Transport Strategy referred to in Minutes 594/13 and 595/13 was a long term strategy.
A six month review of the Carers’ Permits Scheme.
Further to Minute 241/13, the Executive Head of Safer and Stronger Communities reported on the decision to extend the current carers’ permit to include registered childminders.
Sutton’s controlled parking scheme already allowed permits for individual carers, care providers and parents whose children attended specified schools and nurseries. There were also dispensations to cope with occasional major deliveries or work.
There were an estimated 40 registered childminders in the Sutton and Belmont Controlled Parking Zones. They already had access to residents’ permits. Their clients might benefit from a permit similar to the parent’s permit but restrictions on its use would have to be specified and a charge agreed. An estimated loss of parking income amounting to an estimated £12,800 annually would accrue to the Council, which would effectively be subsidising the businesses of registered childminders.
The carer’s permit could, however, be extended to include nannies and unpaid relatives providing child minding services at homes within the controlled parking zones. Charges would be commensurate with the carer’s permit and subject to evidence of the relationship, and there would be a limit of one permit per household. It was not possible to estimate the financial impact of such a scheme, but such information as was available suggested the numbers involved were likely to be minimal.
Occasionally situations arose where an individual resident’s circumstances changed suddenly and dramatically and neither they nor their carers had been able to apply for the relevant concession. Officers had used their discretion to issue additional visitors’ vouchers in such circumstances and it was suggested that position should be formalised.
Mr Charles Cornwell, a resident, was permitted to address the meeting and explained the difficulty nurses and carers had had in attending his home to provide care for his late wife over a period of 20 months. During the course of each day the nurses and carers attended a number of homes in one or more controlled parking zones and permits had to be obtained for each or parking charges paid. In the London Borough of Merton nurses could obtain a single permit that enabled them to park at any address in any controlled parking zone.
Members offered their condolences to Mr Cornwell. They concurred that the Council should not subsidise the businesses of registered childminders but believed that the changes, combined with additional publicity, now proposed would meet Mr Cornwell’s concerns if they could be applied with greater flexibility. It was suggested that the effects of the proposed changes could be monitored over a period of a few months.
Resolved: (i) To confirm that the current concession for care providers is available to all health and social care staff, subject to terms and conditions.
(ii) That authority be delegated to the Executive Head of Safer and Stronger Communities to issue additional visitors’ vouchers in situations where an individual resident’s circumstances change suddenly and dramatically.
(iii) That the carer’s permit be extended to include nannies and unpaid childminders providing child minding services at homes in the Sutton ... view the full minutes text for item 928.
Mulgrave Road Taxi rank - petition
The Committee to note that a petition of 23 signatures was received which read:
“As a licensed taxi driver I would like to register my opposition to any alteration to the current passenger pick up arrangements at Sutton Station and will actively oppose any move to replace the Mulgrave Road taxi rank to the rear of Sutton Station, the Quadrant.”
The following report will cover the response to this petition.
It was reported that a petition bearing 23 names had been received in the following terms:-
“As a licensed taxi driver I would like to register my opposition to any alteration to the current pick up arrangements at Sutton Station and will actively oppose any move to replace the Mulgrave Road taxi rank to the rear of Sutton Station, The Quadrant.”
The Chair reported that governance arrangements for the Sutton Station Gateway scheme were to be put in place and a stakeholder group organised. Several taxi drivers had attended a recent meeting of the proposed stakeholder group and had contributed a number of suggestions.
Resolved: That the petition be noted and the issues be considered by the Sutton Station Gateway Project Board.
To Approve the project management documentation.
Sutton Station was the main gateway into Sutton town centre for people arriving by train and was at the entrance to the town centre by road from the south. The Council had identified a package of improvements to create a ‘gateway’ to the town centre, enhance accessibility to the station and the town centre, improve the ‘public realm’ and transport interchange, and address crime and anti-social behaviour issues. Transport for London had awarded the Council an indicative allocation of £740,000 for the work (Minute 57/13).
All projects and programmes required a governance structure that defined the roles and responsibilities of those involved and ensured clarity of decision making. The key roles for the Project Sponsor, the Project Manager, the Project Board and their chair, the Stakeholder Group, and the officer working group, together with the proposed membership of the programme board, were reported.
The work would be carried out in three phases. Phase 1A would comprise the internal and external works to provide the new side access to Sutton Station and should be completed by March 2014. Phase 1B would comprise the station frontage, work between the station and town centre and some elements in The Quadrant, which would be carried out between July and December 2014. Phase 2 would comprise work between the station frontage and the site of the Brighton Road car park, and further work in The Quadrant which, subject to additional funding, would be carried out between October 2014 and March 2015.
Funding of £1.389 million, including the allocation of £740,000 referred to above, was available for Phases 1A and 1B of the project. Sutton’s contribution of £100,000 would be met from ‘section 106’ contributions or the Opportunity Sutton reserve and the balance from Network Rail and Southern Railway Ltd. An additional £399,000 would be required for Phase 2 which, subject to confirmation, would be met predominantly from ‘section 106’ contributions.
Resolved: (i) To approve the proposed programme and governance arrangements now submitted and outlined above.
(ii) To approve the following membership of the Sutton Station Gateway Project Board:-
Project Board Chair - Councillor Simon Wales: Sutton West ward
Committee Chairs - Councillor Jill Whitehead: Chair, Environment and Neighbourhood Committee
Councillor Marlene Heron: Chair, Sutton Local Committee
Councillor Tony Shields: Chair of Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee
Ward Councillors - Councillor Graham Tope: Sutton Central
Councillor Richard Clifton: Sutton South
Project Sponsor - Eleanor Purser Executive Head of Economic Development, Planning and Sustainability
Programme Manager - Mandy Cherrington: Head of Economic Renewal and Regeneration
Project Manager - Peter Boddy
Partner Agencies - Transport for London: Peter Blaine
Network Rail - Paul Donald
Southern Railway - Mark Epsom
London Assembly - Steve O’Connell AM
(iii) That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director – Environment and Neighbourhoods, in consultation with the Sutton Station Gateway Programme Board, the Chairs of this Committee and relevant local committees, and ward councillors, to progress the development and delivery of the Sutton Station Gateway scheme.
(iv) That authority ... view the full minutes text for item 930.
Final agreement to the list of transport/highway proposals to be submitted to TfL for LIP funding in 2014/15.
The Local Implementation Plan (LIP) was Sutton’s transport plan for the Borough and its contribution to the Mayor of London’s overall transport plan for London. Transport for London (TfL) had determined the outputs/outcomes that should be achieved for each of the three main programme areas.
Sutton’s proposed schemes for each programme area in 2014/15, which had been compiled following a period of consultation, investigation and consideration by ward councillors and local committees, were submitted. They accorded with the Mayor’s transport strategy objectives and outcomes and had been prioritised against the Council’s own LIP objectives. A reserve list of schemes which could be implemented if an approved scheme could not proceed or additional funds became available was also submitted.
In addition to the LIP, TfL had announced that funding was available to boroughs over a four year period to 2016/17 for cycle schemes and a schedule of proposed bids was submitted.
Sutton’s LIP included a delivery plan for the period to 2013/14 and interim targets in a performance monitoring plan. TfL had asked boroughs, as part of their submission, to update their delivery plan for the period 2014/15 to 2016/17 and produce new interim targets for that period. A draft delivery plan and updated interim performance targets were submitted. The percentage of trips made by walking exceeded already the long term target and it was therefore proposed to set a new target of 32% by 2025/26. The long term target to reduce road traffic casualties killed or seriously injured had also been met already and a new target of a 60% reduction by 2025 (from an average in the period 2005-09) was considered achievable.
Sutton had been allocated £1.293 million for the corridors, neighbourhoods and supporting measures programme and £100,000 for local transport funding in 2014/15. The bid now submitted was for a further £200,000 for principal road maintenance and £288,000 for the maintenance of highway structures. The actual amount allocated would depend on the total available and TfL’s assessment of the bids.
Members considered the draft lists of schemes and noted that, in response to consideration by local residents, the majority of the relevant ward councillors had proposed the deletion of the cycle route scheme in Devonshire Avenue.
There was concern that the LIP funding available diminished each year and members noted that the point had been made to the Mayor of London that Sutton could not afford a further reduction in LIP funding. The Leader of the Council was intending to write to the Mayor seeking reassurance that the level of LIP funding would be maintained.
Resolved: (i) That, subject to the deletion of the cycle route scheme for Devonshire Avenue from the reserve list, the draft list of schemes now submitted as the basis for Sutton’s submission to Transport for London for Local Implementation Plan funding in 2014/15 be approved.
(ii) That the draft bids now submitted as the basis of Sutton’s submission to Transport for London for Borough Cycling Programme funding in the period 2013/14 ... view the full minutes text for item 931.
To approve new One Planet Sutton targets following consultation.
Further to Minute 597/13, comments received in response to the consultation were reported. Draft One Planet Sutton targets, amended to reflect the comments received and to ensure the targets met all of the common international target requirements for accreditation to the ‘One Planet’ brand, were submitted under the five new headings referred to in Minute 597/13.
For the initiative to be successful every partner, business and resident in the Borough needed to play their part. To ensure that partners and residents would help to achieve the targets it was recommended that they be agreed in the amended form which reflected the views of those consulted. The draft targets had been reviewed by Bioregional, the Council’s strategic partner and owner of the ‘One Planet’ brand, who had indicated that they were likely to be endorsed. Simon Courage of Bioregional was present to answer members’ questions.
It would be possible to propose higher levels of activity to try to achieve One Planet Sutton earlier or to achieve higher targets, but it would inevitably increase costs further and some necessary technologies were not yet developed sufficiently. It was proposed to focus on a small number of targets that could be delivered each year whilst developing the delivery of later targets.
Members considered the comments received, the responses thereto and the amended targets.
Resolved: That the comments received on the consultation be noted, and the amended targets for One Planet Sutton, now submitted, be adopted.
This report sets out the options that the ECO and Green Deal task and finish group recommend to the committee in order to maximise the opportunities the Green Deal and ECO funding can offer the Borough. To Follow
Further to Minute 1029/12, it was reported that the cross-party task and finish group had investigated the most suitable approach for the Council to maximise benefits from the new Energy Company Obligation and Green Deal; which had the potential to help reduce fuel poverty in the Borough and CO2 levels, and create more jobs and business.
Energy Company Obligation (ECO) was a legal obligation that required energy companies to promote and fund measures to improve domestic energy efficiency, and reduce emissions and household heating costs.
The Green Deal was a government initiative designed to encourage the installation of energy-saving measures in homes and businesses by providing a loan for the cost of the initial work.
Three options had been considered for maximising ECO funded investment: a general promotion at no additional cost; a funded general promotion through a high profile marketing campaign; and a partnership with a company who would promote ECO funding in the Borough, enabling the Council to negotiate better funding for more expensive measures. The advantages and disadvantages of each option were reported. The third option, with a focus on promoting ECO to vulnerable households in the Borough, was recommended as the most beneficial option.
Four options had been considered for maximising benefits from the Green deal: do nothing; procure and promote a Green Deal provider; provide assistance in securing referral fees for creating leads for a Green Deal provider; and becoming a Green Deal provider contributing financial support for Green Deal work. The advantages and disadvantages of each option were reported. All but the second option were considered inappropriate because they would mean the loss of potential benefits or involve the Council in high costs or unjustifiably high financial risk. However the second option could also incorporate a referral fee through a partnership approach. Partners could be either traditional sub-contractors or a co-operative, but there was considered to be too much risk attached to the latter.
Tenders had been invited from 12 organisations using the Greater London Authority’s RENEW framework. Only one tender had been returned, from Climate Energy. Their tender had been assessed against the specification criteria, the results of which were submitted, and complied with it. The task and finish group had therefore recommended that Climate Energy be selected as the Council’s partner.
Resolved: (i) To concur with the recommendation that the Council seek a partner for the Energy Company Obligation and Green Deal initiatives and to endorse the selection process.
(ii) That Climate Energy be endorsed as the Council’s Energy Company Obligation and Green Deal partner.
To agree the establishment of a committee to oversee the management of Beddington Farmlands.
The ‘section 106’ agreement relating to planning application No. N/93/126/FUL required the owners of Beddington Farmlands to set up a Conservation and Access Management Committee (CAMC) as the key strategic decision making body for the management of Beddington Farmlands. A draft constitution that complied with the objectives and elements of the constitution set out in the ‘section 106’ agreement was submitted.
The CAMC would be an independent body on which the Council had representation. It would normally meet quarterly and the landowners would meet the cost of providing administrative and secretarial support, with appropriate advice from Council officers. The land owners had agreed to vary the terms of the ‘section 106’ agreement to allow an additional fourth councillor to sit on the CAMC to allow equal representation of the Hackbridge and Beddington Communities. The four councillors would be appointed on the basis of proportionality. Four community and technical representatives had to be agreed between the Council and owners’ representatives at the first meeting of the CAMC. The Council had sought nominations of suitable people from community groups in the Beddington and Hackbridge areas. Fourteen nominations had been received and were reported.
It was suggested that there should also be a role for a senior Council officer who could provide support but not be a member of the CAMC. The officer would ensure that it was run properly, and could respond to members’ aspirations and ensure they met the objectives of the constitution and the terms of the ‘section 106’ agreement. It was suggested that there should also be a presence at the site, such as a warden, to report directly to the CAMC to ensure that it was properly advised about the activities of the owner, Viridor, There was no specific provision for such a role.
Resolved: (i) That, subject to the concurrence of the owners of Beddington Farmlands, the draft constitution set out in the Appendix to these Minutes be adopted.
(ii) That four councillors be nominated to represent the London Borough of Sutton on the Conservation and Access Management Committee.
(iii) To note the nominations received for community representatives and to agree the following criteria for their selection for appointment:-
· Ability to speak on behalf of the communities adjacent to Beddington Farmlands
· Technical knowledge relating to land management
· Nature conservation experience and knowledge
· Organisational abilities
· Financial experience
· Links to significant local community groups and an ability to represent and feed back to them
The following matter has been dealt with through the Urgency Procedure since the last meeting of the Committee:
Agreement to the South London Waste Partnership (SLWP) exit strategy with Environmental Waste Controls (EWC) for the provision of reuse and recycling centres for the Partnership.
Action Taken – (i) To agree to the exit strategy as recommended by the Joint Waste Committee which allows the transfer of this contract to RB Kingston.
(ii) To agree to the additional capital funding from reserves of between £100k and £150k in order to purchase the assets required to maintain service delivery at Kimpton Parkway.
The following matter had been dealt with under the Council’s Urgency Procedure since the previous meeting of the Committee:-
Agreement to the South London Waste Partnership (SLWP) exit strategy with Environmental Waste Controls (EWC) for the provision of re-use and recycling centres for the Partnership.
Action taken – (i) To agree to the exit strategy as recommended by the Joint Waste Committee which allows the transfer of the contract to the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames.
(ii) To agree to the additional capital funding from reserves of between £100,000 and £150,000 in order to purchase the assets required to maintain service delivery at Kimpton Parkway.
Resolved: To concur with the action taken.
reference from the Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee
The Chair directed that this matter be brought forward as an urgent item so that officers could progress it following the decisions of the Local Committee.
Further to Minutes 590/13 and 591/13, it was reported that the Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee had decided to progress with the removal of the Blue Badge holders’ concessions to use residents’ parking bays. However, they had decided not to introduce shared-use ‘pay and display and permit holder’ bays along certain sections of Cotswold Road and Downs Road because there would be no increase in the charge for residents’ permit fees in the current financial year.
Resolved: To concur with the decision of the Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee.
Fuel Poverty Strategy
The Chair directed that this matter be brought forward as an urgent item so that the Committee’s decision could also be considered by the Housing, Economy and Business Committee at their meeting on 8 October 2013 and a strategy implemented in January 2014.
As part of the Council’s role in supporting its local community during the current period of austerity it was proposed that a fuel poverty strategy be developed. The strategy would seek to understand the causes and effects of fuel poverty and to identify households within the local population who were fuel poor or most at risk of fuel poverty. The intention was to deliver effective action and interventions that would reduce and, if possible, prevent fuel poverty in the Borough.
It was proposed that a joint task and finish group of councillors from this Committee and the Housing, Economy and Business Committee oversee the development of a strategy, consult with local stakeholders and produce a draft for approval by the Strategy and Resources Committee in the New Year 2014.
Resolved: (i) That a task and finish group be appointed jointly with the Housing, Economy and Business Committee to oversee the development of a fuel poverty strategy for the Borough.
(ii) That Councillors Stephen Fenwick, Lester Holloway, Miguel Javelot and Tony Shields be appointed to serve on the joint task and finish group.
(iii) That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director – Environment and Neighbourhoods, in consultation with the Chair of this Committee and the Chair of the Housing, Economy and Business Committee, and to the Strategic Director – Adult Social Services, Housing and Health, to agree terms of reference for the joint task and finish group, including consultation with interested stakeholders.
date of next meeting
The next meeting will be held on 5 December 2013.
Resolved: To note that the next meeting of the Committee will be on Thursday, 5 December 2013.