Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Panel noted there were no substitute members.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) 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 and Scrutiny members are asked to 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 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.

Councillor G Mohindra declared personal interest in agenda item 6 as he was a member of Chigwell Parish Council.

Councillor P Spencer declared personal interest in agenda item 6 as he was a member of Buckhurst Hill Parish Council.

Councillors C Pond and K Angold-Stephens declared personal interests in agenda item 6 as they were members of Loughton Parish Council.

Councillor J Philip declared personal interest in agenda item 6 as he was a member of Theydon Bois Parish Council.

To agree the notes of the last meeting held on 7 July 2011 (attached). The notes of that meeting had the District Council’s Draft Climate Change Strategy and the Local Biodiversity Action Plan attached to them as an appendix. It was felt that for reasons of economy and brevity they should not be attached to the notes which are attached here. However they can be accessed on the District Council’s website by right clicking on the address below and using “Open Hyperlink,” please go to “Printed Minutes,” and pages 9 – 70.

Agenda for Safer, Cleaner, Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel on Thursday, 7th July, 2011, 7.30 pm

The notes from the 7 July 2011 meeting were agreed as a correct record.

Panel members noted that:

• under paragraph 4.1. – a report on the new SITA contract would be coming to this Panel in the new year when contract details were known.
• Under paragraph 6, Councillor Spencer noted he had seen a sign stating there ‘may’ be CCTV cameras in the vicinity and wondered if this was still a legal statement.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Panel and associated Work Programme, which is attached. The Panel are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The Panel noted their Terms of Reference and Work Programme. They also noted that the review of the new SITA contract should be added to their work programme.

(Director pf Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report.

At the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel on 13 September, a report was considered regarding the Environment Agency and the River Roding Catchment. Members of the Safer, Cleaner, Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel were invited to this meeting as well. The Panel members agreed for a response to member's concerns from Environment Agency officers to be submitted to either the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel on 3 October or Safer, Cleaner, Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel on 11 October. However, there hasn't been sufficient time to submit a report to these panels, and the Safer, Cleaner, Greener Panel for 11 October has now been cancelled.

On Tuesday 4 October Environment Agency officers visited EFDC Environment and Street Scene officers to discuss the questions and concerns raised by members at the 13 September meeting which the Environment Agency officers attended and to respond to earlier questions raised by EFDC officers. Officers have until the end of October to finalise the District Council’s response and have it approved by the relevant panel. To reciprocate the arrangement at the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel on 13 September, officers are inviting members of the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel to attend this meeting.

The report submitted to the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel on 13 September 2011 is attached as an appendix.

The Panel considered the Council’s response to the Environment Agency Consultation on managing flood risk in the Roding catchment area. This had previously gone to a special meeting of the Planning Services Standing Panel held on 13 September 2011. Since that meeting, EFDC officers had met with Environment Agency (EA) officers and had put the concerns raised by the Planning Services Panel to them. The EA officers were able to answer some of the questions and although a number of concerns still remained, it was now felt that there was sufficient information to enable a formal response to be submitted.

The Panel considered the report setting out the discussions and the basis for the Council’s formal objection to the proposals on the grounds of the potentially detrimental effects, in terms of flood risk on the residents of Epping Forest adjacent to the floodplain; individual properties and areas of land including the land owned by the Council; and ordinary watercourses within the district. For some streams in the Roding catchment, the EA was not the enforcement authority but the District Council. This would have resourcing implications for the Council and where they were the riparian owner of the land, if it got flooded or was in need of maintenance it would be up to the District to put it right. Any flooding implication would also have wider implications for planning as well.

Councillor Spencer said that the EA map showed the flood plains. Would there be maps produced (by the EA) updating the flood plains after they have carried out their work. Mr Durrani, the Assistant Director for Environment and Street Scene, noted that the EA were proposing to carry out no maintenance on the River Roding, letting the river revert back to its natural state. The river had a higher element of flooding once it entered Redbridge, with a higher risk of damage to property, so they were looking to stop maintenance in the rural parts of its course. As for the flood plain mapping, they would revise the maps on a regular basis. But officers were unsure of their modelling for this. If left alone the river would start to shift course. But officers could not challenge their modelling as it was their data.

Councillor Mohindra wanted to know the cost implications to the Council. Mr Durrani said it was not clear at this stage; the EA said it should not change much. In the past EFDC used to call on the EA to help out, but they would now have to call on the Parish Councils where they were riparian owner. Officers would monitor the work closely and report back to the Cabinet on the financial implications.

The Chairman asked who would be responsible if there was a big incident such as a chemical spill. She was told that hopefully the EA would be. Their help would certainly be asked for on the larger incidents, as they have said that the main responsibility remained with them.

Councillor Breare-Hall  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

(Director of Environment and Street Scene) Attached are the minutes from the Waste Management Partnership Board meeting of 16 June 2011 for the Panel’s information.

The Panel noted the Waste Management Partnership Board minutes of 16 June 2011. They noted the good recycling figures at 62.6%, but were disappointed that the minutes took so long to get to this Panel.

(Director of Environment and Street Scene) Attached are the draft minutes of the Bobbingworth Former Landfill Site Local Liaison Group Meeting of 25 May 2011.

The minutes of the Bobbingworth Former Landfill Site Local Liaison Group meeting held on 25 May 2011 were noted.

(Director of Environment and Street Scene) Attached are the draft unapproved minutes of the Inter-Authority Agreement Member Working Group meeting of 7 June 2011.

The minutes of the Inter Authority Agreement Member Working Group  meeting held on 7 June 2011 were noted.

The Panel debated the merits of moving the start time of these meetings to 7pm. On reflection they agreed that it should stay at 7.30.

            RESOLVED:

            That the start time of this Panel remain at 7.30pm.

The next scheduled meeting of the Panel is on Tuesday 10 January 2012 at 7.00p.m. in Committee Room 1, and thereafter on the following days:

Tuesday 21 February at 7.00p.m. in Committee Room 1; and

Tuesday 10 April at 7.00p.m. in Committee Room 1

The dates of future meetings of the Panel were noted.