Agenda and minutes

(Director of Governance)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted that there were no substitute members for this meeting.

To agree the notes of the last meeting held on 17 November 2015.

The notes of the meetings held on 17 November 2015 and 17 December 2015 were agreed.

(Director of Governance) To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Members Code of Conduct.

(Chairman / Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Committee. This is attached along with an ongoing work programme. Members are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The Committee noted their Terms of Reference and Work Programme.

To consider the attached PICK from. We hope to have David Sprunt and Vicky Duff, two officers from ECC Transportation Strategy and Engagement section attend the meeting to give their expert opinion on this proposal.

David Sprunt is from the Transportation Strategy & Engagement, Economic Growth and Development and Vicky Duff is the Network Management Group Manager, Highways.

The Committee welcomed David Sprunt, from the Essex Transportation Strategy and Engagement, Economic Growth; and Vicky Duff, the Essex Network Management Group Manager. They were there to enlighten the committee on those facts and policies used by Essex County Council and the guidance issued by the Department of Transport on road speeds, especially relating to the implementation of 20mph limits. A copy of their presentation are attached to theses minutes.

The Committee noted that:

·         That Essex CC had a Speed Management Strategy advised by the Department of Transport circular 01/2013;

·         It had been established by research that 20mph speed limits generally only led to small reductions in traffic speeds – as established at Portsmouth;

·         The latest advice was that a mix of 20mph limits and 20mph zones would be better, providing that the signing was correct;

·         The objective would be that ‘any 20mph restrictions should be self-enforcing’;

·         Any 20mph limit of zone would require a Speed Limit Order, which had to be consulted on;

·         The current policy allowed for the consideration of 20mph limits on local roads if the mean speeds were between 24 and 29mph, only then would the Cabinet Member consider putting in a 20mph restriction;

·         At the beginning of the limits there would have to be clear signage and also at the end of the restrictions. There would also have to be repeater signs along the route;

·         20mph zones had traffic calming measures e.g. speed humps, chicanes etc. these zones applied not just to one road but to whole areas, such as estates;

·         It was noted that generally people did not like them and the low speeds over traffic calming measures also produced more noise for residents;

·         The most effective method for reducing speed was the use of chicanes, but it needed some major engineering work to put them in;

·         20mph signs could be used a calming feature but they would not physically reduce the speeds;

·         The county also has a “20’s plenty” scheme used mainly outside schools, but very little reductions in speeds were achieved;

·         This scheme was also trying to affect the children’s behaviour as well as their parents;

·         Advisory speed limit signs could be also be used outside schools, they were not mandatory and thus no speed limit order was required;

·         Before a scheme was put into place, information was required in the form of speed surveys, traffic surveys and collision data;

·         It was noted that a lot of areas in Essex did not have high collision rates for Children and pedestrians;

·         Repeat signage in an area tended to create clutter on those roads;

·         Essex police did not have the resources to enforce these areas.

The meeting was then opened out to questions from the members.

Councillor Neville thanked the officers for attending the meeting. He asked why Essex had opted for at first having mean speeds of between 24 to 29mph before they would consider putting in a 20mph limit, as the Department of Transport note for guidance did not stipulate this. Ms  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

To receive a short presentation from the Council’s area crime analyst on the work they undertake for the Council.

The Chairman welcomed Caroline Wiggins the Safer Communities Manager and Kim Stalabrass, the West Local Policing Area Partnership Analyst, who gave a short presentation on the local crime and disorder figures up to and including November 2015, via the Home Office system, ‘iQuanta’. This system provided data for a 3 year span. A copy of the presentation is attached to these minutes for information.

The Committee noted that:

·         All Crime was up by 14% (630 cases) in comparison to previous years figures to date;

·         On a month by month total – in December 2012 there were 591 cases compared to November 2015 with 642 cases, an increase of 7.9% (51 cases) over 3 years;

·         Epping Forest was 8^th within Essex – that is 5.9% below the county average;

·         That equated to 56.835 reported incidents against a county average of 60.421 incidents;

·         Against other similar authorities we had similar figures to Maidstone, who the ONS identified as a match to Epping. Our figures were 56.835 crimes to Maidstone’s 56.588 crimes;

·         Broxbourne was a border council similar to us with similar proximity to London and transport links and had 62.278 crimes and Watford  (with 72.614 crimes) had similar tube and Motorway links;

·         The figures for violence against the person showed a 27% (246) increase in Epping Forest in comparison to the previous year;

·         The November 2015 total was 50% higher than December 2012. However, this may be due to the change in the way these crimes were recorded;

·         Epping was 17% below the Essex average;

·         In comparison with other similar authorities, the figures for the year ending November 2015, Epping had 1690, Maidstone 2690, Watford 1704 and Broxbourne 1449;

Councillor Neville asked if there were new categories for violence against the person and was told that new communications and IT categories had been added.

Ms Stalabrass continued:

·         Burglary of dwellings was up by 15% in comparison to the previous year. This increase was partly identified as people coming form Eastern Europe flying into Stanstead committing burglaries and then flying straight out.

Councillor Janet Whitehouse asked just how seriously did the police take this and did they catch anyone? She was told that they have known hot spots and have had some successes. The problem with Epping Forest was that the criminals were transient and we had good transport links.

Councillor Avey postulated that a lot of crime was not reported such as small burglaries and minor assaults. Mr Gardener, the Communities Safety Officer added that burglary was a disturbing crime and the police would always investigate as it one of the key priorities in our area. Police worked on intelligence nowadays and were targeting the 20% that was the cause of 80% of crime, and were quite successful in this area. Councillor Patel commented that maybe we could have a comparison on how much police resources were put in different areas.

Ms Stalabrass continued with her presentation, noting that:

·         Within the county Epping was 33% above the Essex average;

·         However this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

(Director of Communities) to consider the attached report.

Caroline Wiggins, the Safer Communities Manager, introduced the EFDC CCTV strategy for 2016-2022, noting that this report had recently gone to the Cabinet for their information and agreement.  She was accompanied by Adrian Petty, the CCTV Operations Officer.

The Committee noted that the strategy covered the period from 2015 to 2022, following on from the previous strategy that was produced in 2008, when the Community Safety Team took over the responsibility for the Council’s CCTV provision as part of the Safer, Cleaner Greener Review.

The Strategy set out the Council’s current CCTV provision, detailing respective locations, numbers of cameras, condition and costs for maintenance, and repair and replacements over the next seven years, along with recommendations for de-commissioning of equipment. It also provided an overview of the benefits that were realised for the local communities in which it was installed and the various use made of CCTV footage by the Police and insurance companies.

The Council’s success in the use of CCTV had generated ongoing demands from Directorates to install new CCTV equipment within key areas of the district and the point has now been reached where an increased budget was required, to meet the costs of replacing old equipment and the increased servicing and maintenance costs, which was also covered by the Strategy.

In July 2014 the Code of Practice (CoP) for CCTV operated by EFDC was reviewed and changes were made to reflect the new national Code released in 2013. Further to this, in 2015, a separate Code for the use of Rapid Deployment CCTV was written and was due to be incorporated into the general CCTV CoP.

Councillor Surtees noted that the requirements for CCTV signage were not as clear as they could be in places around the district. Mr Petty replied that everywhere there were CCTV cameras should be properly signed. However, they did not want to overpopulate an area with signage. In some areas they put larger signs in key areas. They acted as deterrents on their own. If you could suggest where signs are needed we could put them up. Most are of A4 size.

Councillor Patel noted that there were always technical changes in CCTV cameras and something purchased now will be quickly outdated; could we consider a rental option. Mr Petty agreed that technology did not stand still. Some areas have a thing called stockpiling, that is, a rental agreement with companies for equipment that costs a lot of money.  We do not think that this was for us. We have a 7 year use of our equipment and have operating systems that can use old and new technologies at once. Councillor Bassett asked if all our systems were of evidential level. He was told that they were.

Councillor Bassett then asked if we held a list of what equipment all Town and Parish Councils have. Mr Petty said that he knew what Waltham Abbey and Nazeing had, but not what the others had. Essex Police would like a map of where  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

(Director of Communities) to consider the attached report.

Caroline Wiggins, the Safer Communities Manager, introduced the report on the recently proposed Policing cuts and their implications on the Council’s Community Safety Service.

This originated from November 2015, when the PCC, Nick Alston and the Chief Constable of Essex Police announced proposals to make significant changes to local Policing across Essex, in a move to ensure that Essex Police was fit for purpose, in the future.

This report was aimed at starting a discussion with members on the implications of the reduction in police resources and the impact it would have on the Council’s Community Safety service.

The PCC and Chief Constable announced the funding challenges facing Essex Police over the next four years, which would see a reduction of £63 million in the Police budget by 2019/20. This was presented as the driver for making changes to the way that Essex Police operates in future and the need to significantly reduce community policing as from April 2016.

The Safer Communities Officer, Paul Gardener, added that the problem council officers faced were that they were best guessing what was going to happen in the district. They were looking at potential reductions in policing, such as triaging calls into High, Medium or Low risks and then only reacting high risk cases and fielding the other calls to other relevant authorities. He was mindful that the Council would pick up more work and there would be more disgruntled members of the public not having the Police act on their problems.

Anti-social Behaviour powers were given to us by the Government and they would use them. But it would raise the officer’s workload, especially as the Police would not act. This may also result in more problems at the reception desks from disgruntled members of the public. Therefore, it was likely that customer facing staff would need additional training as more diverse enquiries were received from the public.

The Council only had two ASB officers to deal with the Epping Forest District. They were seeing a rise in cases from 192 to 331 cases. The public would make their feelings known to Members who will then let the officers know, increasing their caseload as they try and resolve complaints on behalf of Members and this would be very time consuming.

Ms Wiggins added that officers needed to know what Members wanted to take as priorities in referred cases. They needed to know how to balance their resources.

Councillor Sartin said that it may be useful if members could have a training course on this. Ms Wiggins replied that until the plans were made know in April, they needed guidance on how Members would like officers to handle this.

Councillor Surtees noted that all the problems seemed to be coming our way as a local authority. For example, the PSOs provided good intelligence but they were now getting rid of them. Ms Wiggins added that they were also looking to the voluntary sector to pick up some of the slack. The Police would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

(Director of Communities) to consider the attached report.

The Assistant Community Health and Wellbeing Manager, James Warwick, introduced the report on the Reality Roadshow initiative.

Building on the long-standing success of Crucial Crew, the Reality Roadshow initiative was a personal safety and health & well-being event that brought together a host of statutory and voluntary agencies, to deliver a day of educational workshops to Year 9 (14 year old) pupils at school in the district. It was specifically tailored to address young people’s issues that have been identified as a priority concern locally. It provides over 1100 pupils in the district with expert advice and guidance on making the right choices in life for good health and well being.

The day starts with an interactive drama production delivered by the Arc Theatre Company which tackles the high level priority of child sexual exploitation (CSE) and the law around producing and distributing indecent images of people under the age of consent. This bespoke production had been developed specifically for Epping Forest Reality Roadshow in line with emerging concerns and trends reported by schools in the area. The production explored issues relating to teenage relationships and online safety.  Pupils then rotate through five, classroom based workshops which were approximately 40 minutes in duration.  The event culminates in a presentation to the whole school, by an ex-offender with real life experiences of the issues explored during the day.

Pupils participated in either 5 or 6 workshops depending on individual school timetables and each session was specifically designed to address current issues facing local young people. The workshops delivered in 2015/16 were:

• The Consequences of Crime – delivered by Essex Magistrates
• Online Internet Safety – EFDC’s Community Health and Well-being Team
• Sexual Health - NHS Sexual Health Services
• Legal Highs and Substance Misuse - Alcohol & Drugs Advisory Service (ADAS)
• Alcohol Awareness - AlcoHELP
• Healthy Relationships and Domestic Abuse - Safer Places

The impact of the Reality Roadshow programme on participants was generally very significant, as the messages given are very clear and designed to show the worse case scenarios of being involved in negative behaviours. The programme also promoted the opportunity for young people to make changes in their lives and to receive support and advice from the various agencies available locally.

• Pupils were equipped with current and appropriate information and able to make informed choices;
• Pupils had the opportunity to hear and learn from the real life stories of recovering addicts and ex-offenders;
• Pupils were able to ask for help and support about issues they may encounter;
• Pupils were signposted to agencies that could offer further support, and how to access this;
• The web links provided were uploaded onto the pupil pages of the school’s website, thereby enabling anonymous access to information covering the support services available.

In addition to benefiting the pupils directly, Reality Roadshow also indirectly benefited parents and carers, through empowering the young people to be able to make the right choices in life regarding relationships, alcohol, substances and so on; their home life was therefore likely to improve,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

To receive a report the DCLG consultation on the proposed changes to the National Planning Policy.

Report to follow.

Mr Ken Bean, the Planning Policy Manager introduced the report on the response to the proposed changes to the national planning policy consultation.  The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in 2012 and was supported by the online Planning Practice Guidance. Amendments are now proposed to the NPPF which encompassed the following:

·         Broadening the definition of affordable housing, to expand the range of low cost housing opportunities for those aspiring to own their new home (this includes the Government’s intention to introduce Starter Homes as a type of low cost home ownership);

·         Increasing the density of development around commuter hubs, to make more efficient use of land in suitable locations;

·         Supporting sustainable new settlements, development on brownfield land and small sites (up to 10 units), and delivery of housing allocated in plans; and

·         Supporting delivery of starter homes.

The consultation period, which commenced on 7 December, had now been extended to 22 February 2016. There were nine sections contained with the consultation paper and 23 questions on which answers were sought. A discussion of the issues raised in response to the proposed changes in the NPPF in accordance with the questions posed was put in the appendix to the report for consideration.

Mr Bean commented that if members had comments on the proposed answers drafted by officers to the CLG consultation then they could report them to him by 29 January. These would then be considered prior to sending the final version of EFDC’s response that Councillor Bassett, as the Portfolio Holder responsible for planning policy, would sign off in time to meet the extended DCLG deadline.

Mr Bean added that the Housing and Planning Bill was now going through Parliament, the devil would be in the detail which he anticipated coming forward fairly soon in the form of draft regulations.  In relation to the current NPPF consultation the key was the changes proposed to the affordable housing definition through introduction of starter homes for first time buyers aged below 40 and exactly how this would be implemented. Also, Epping Forest District bordered four London Boroughs (Enfield, Redbridge, Havering and Waltham Forest).  There was very real concern that the disparity between the Starter Homes property value limit in London Boroughs (£450,000) compared with Districts immediately outside of London such as Epping Forest (£250,000), very few property types and areas within Epping Forest District were likely to qualify and where they did could lead to demand for properties from people currently in residence outside of the District.  At present it was not clear what the mechanism for registering an interest in purchasing a Starter Home would be, or how this would be managed.

Councillor Brady expressed her concerns about Brownfield sites in the Green Belt and if they could be developed. Mr Bean replied that responding to the current NPPF consultation was the Council’s opportunity to put our views on this to the government. He also noted that in relation to Starter Homes there was no requirement for S106 agreements  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

(Director of Neighbourhoods) to consider the update on the current position of the Local Plan.

The Committee next considered the regular update on the current position of the Local Plan. They noted that:

·         A set of member workshops were being held to get the views of Members on the draft Local plan;

·         District, Town and Parish Council representatives have already attend the workshops that have been held;

·         Work continued on finalising the evidence base reports which will be used to inform the policies included in the Draft Plan Preferred Approach;

·         Government guidance and emerging Inspectors’ reports make clear the need to undertake a comprehensive Green Belt Review of the entire District before the release of any Green Belt land is considered;

·         Stage 2 of the Green Belt review has now commenced;

·         The Council was also undertaking a settlement capacity analysis of the 10 largest settlements in the District, namely Epping, Theydon Bois, Buckhurst Hill, Chigwell, Loughton/Debden, Waltham Abbey, North Weald Bassett, Chipping Ongar, Lower Nazeing and Roydon.  The purpose of the work was to ensure that the District can address as much of its housing requirement as possible within our existing settlements, and so minimise the potential need to utilise Green Belt land for development;

·         Further transport modelling work is being undertaken by Essex County Council. This will look at the implications for the transport network of growth and how it can be distributed across the Housing Market Area. The outputs will then be considered by the districts and jointly by the four authorities at the Cooperation for Sustainable Development Board; and

·         Officers have also been involved in transport work being undertaken by the London Borough of Enfield and continue to keep a watching brief on wider transport work being undertaken as part of Enfield’s Northern Gateway Access Package (NGAP);

·         A set of member workshops each covering different topics / policy areas were being held to get the views of Members on the draft Local Plan.

Councillor Sartin asked when the stage 2 study of the greenbelt would be ready. She was told that the appointed consultants officers were presently undertaking the necessary fieldwork and analysis and that it was hoped that a draft final report would be produced by the end of March.

Councillor Surtees asked if we were on track for a draft Local Plan this year. Councillor Bassett said that they were but added that the council was also still waiting for the completion of information and evidence outside of our direct control, for instance from the ECC on transport. Members were being asked to attend the current programme of  workshops to give their views.

RESOLVED:

That the progress report on the Local Plan be noted.

(Director of Neighbourhoods) to consider a short report summarising the conclusions reached at the recent special Neighbourhoods and Community Services Select Committee meeting held on 17 December 2015, looking at the waste contract.

Report to follow.

The Director of Neighbourhoods, Derek Macnab introduced his report on the recent meeting reviewing waste and recycling collection arrangements. This was a special meeting of this committee dedicated to this one subject, held on 17 December 2015 and was open to the public and members to put their questions to members of the Biffa management team and relevant council officers.

In order to ensure that the review focused on the main issues that Members wished to explore, this Committee in September 2015 established the scope of the review and how the meeting will be practically undertaken.  As a result, it was agreed that the review would be undertaken in 4 parts, covering the following issues:

1)    The procurement Process;

2)    Mobilisation and first 6 months of Contract;

3)    The revised arrangements from 12 May 2015.

Part four of the review was to reach a set of conclusions around what could have been done better and to recommend any key considerations with respect to how the Council could improve procurement and implementation of any future major service contracts. The report sought to reflect on the discussion that took place at that meeting in order to fulfil that requirement.

Following the review officers have reviewed the meeting and have noted the following key learning points:

Part One - Procurement:

·                Competitive Dialogue proved to be an effective means of procuring the new Waste Contract, from both the Client and Contractors perspective.

·                Although the Members interview only scored 10% of the quality scores, and on this occasion did not materially affect the final award, it was considered that Member Interviews are still beneficial for future service contracts.

·                The role that cross-party Portfolio Holder Advisory Groups play in shaping service contracts was recognised as a positive.

·                With contracts which involve major service changes, the costs to the Council should not be underestimated in terms of advising residents etc.  The £50,000 on the Waste Contract was in hindsight, too small.

Part Two – Mobilisation and First Six Months:

·                Overall the Waste and Recycling Contract mobilisation went well, with service quality maintained over the period November 2014 to May 2015.

·                Although TUPE Arrangements were satisfactorily completed for staff transferring from SITA to BIFFA, there were some concerns highlighted regarding communication with staff despite Biffa’s best endeavours.

·                The innovation forum established between client officers and contractor, proved useful in addressing service issues and identifying areas for improvement, this should be encouraged as good practice.

·                The original start date for the change to 4-day collection was not achieved, due to delays in vehicle acquisition and transfer of depots.  However, the revised date of 12 May was still in retrospect too early.

·                The number and type of informal arrangements that exist between householders and collection crews should not be underestimated and should be specifically addressed in terms of debriefing at end of contract periods.

·                Whilst it was felt that the problems encountered around the change to 4-day collection were not simply attributable to the prior notification information provided, it was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

To consider which reports, if any, should be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

The Committee thought that a short report back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee should be given on the items covered at this meeting, especially a report on the Waste Review meeting.

To note the scheduled future meeting of this Select Committee:

15^th March 2016.

The meeting noted the future meeting dates for this Committee.