The Council Rules provide for questions by any member of the Council to the Leader or any Portfolio Holder, without notice on:
(i) reports under the previous item; or
(ii) any other matter of a non operational character in relation to the powers and duties of the Council or which affects all or part of the District or some or all of its inhabitants.
Council Rules provide that answers to questions without notice may take the form of:
(a) direct oral answer from the Leader or, at the request of the Leader, from another member of the Cabinet;
(b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication;
(c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner; or
(d) where the question relates to an operational matter, the Leader or a member of the Cabinet will request that a response be given direct to the questioner by the relevant Chief Officer.
In accordance with the Council Rules, a time limit of thirty minutes is set for questions. Any question not dealt with within the time available will receive a written reply. The Chairman may extend this period by up to a further 10 minutes at their discretion.
Minutes:
(a) Criminal Casework for District
Councillor D. Sunger asked the Portfolio Holder for Safer, Greener and Transport to inform him of details concerning the criminal casework for the whole district that had taken place since the introduction of the EFDC funded police officers.
Councillor S. Kane advised that the EDFC police officers and the Community Safety Team were collaborating and a lot of work had been completed. In particular, there had been multiple charges for offences of burglaries in the south of the district.
Councillor S. Kane reminded members that the contact details for reporting issues was as follows; immediate threat to person or property, you should phone 999; anything else or if the crime has already happened 101; or search for Essex Police Report It online. There was also an Epping Forest equivalent to report issues online. He requested that members only use the shared Community Safety Team’s email, to enable the awareness across whole team and for it to be recorded correctly.
(a) Local Plan
Councillor M. Sartin asked the Planning and Governance Portfolio Holder what were the financial and other implications associated with the delayed submission of the Local Plan following the Planning Court Injunction and subsequent appeals.
Councillor J. Philip advised that a final assessment of the costs was not yet available, although it had been estimated between 10 to 20 thousand pounds. There had been court costs of £10,000 awarded from the first appeal but it had also taken a lot of officers time, which had been primarily Senior Officers including the Assistant Director of Planning Policy and the Chief Executive. Going forward, it would be difficult to determine the effects of the delay but the Local Plan had now been submitted.
(b) Epping Shopping Retail Park
Councillor L. Mead advised that the bins at the Epping Forest Retail Park were either too small or not being collected regularly and asked the Environment Portfolio Holder what could be done about this situation.
The Assets and Economic Development Portfolio Holder, Councillor A. Grigg advised that the responsibility lay with Epping Forest Retail Park. She had previously contact the Assistant Director (Technical), who had advised that that the layout of the bins were not suitable and she would ask officers to approach the Retail Park again about this issue.
(c) Step Free Access to Buckhurst Hill Tube Station
Councillor A. Patel asked the Safer, Greener and Transport Portfolio Holder for an update following a meeting with Buckhurst Hill Parish Council, TFL and officers regarding the implementation of step free access to Buckhurst Hill Tube Station and other associated issues.
Councillor S. Kane advised that the additional disabled street parking bay had been passed onto NEPP; the removal of one of the three barriers had been completed; the repainting of barriers and hand rails in contrasting colours had been completed; the redecoration of the subway had been felt to be cost inhibited at this time and installation of gate in the fence to provide access to the stairway was pending a decision whilst officers found out who was responsible.
(d) St John’s Road Site
Councillor J.M. Whitehouse asked the Leader whether the feasibility study by the leisure contractors would encompass the whole site, and if not, what would the plans be for the rest of the site.
Councillor C. Whitbread advised that the intention was to potentially create a partnership with the Town Council to redevelop the entire site encompassing a sports centre, swimming pool, retail and housing.
(e) St John’s Conservation Area
Councillor G. Chambers asked the Safer, Greener and Transport Portfolio Holder what assurances he could give residents of Buckhurst Hill, that the draft proposals set out in the St John’s Conservation Area would carried forward to Cabinet for agreement.
Councillor S. Kane advised that unfortunately the only qualified officer that could progress the draft proposals for the St John’s Conservation Area, would not be available until at least January 2019.
(f) Broadway Retail Premises
Councillor M. Owen asked the Assets and Economic Development Portfolio Holder whether;
(i) it was fair to increase the rental income of Save the Children by 38%;
(ii) could she give an update on the Economic Impact Assessment and whether the rents could be frozen whilst this took place; and
(iii) could she give an update on the empty units in the Broadway.
Councillor A. Grigg advised that there had been no rental review for Save the Children since 2011. The premises also benefited from an 80% business rate reduction and this could be seen as beneficial. The premises were located within a prominent area of the Broadway and rates were higher, although they had been offered another premise near the other charity shops.
The impact assessment study had been delayed at the request of the Town Centre Partnership although the Council had now instructed Lichfields to undertake an independent review of retail alongside an economic assessment of the recent development of the shopping park on the Broadway. This would conclude with a report, available in approximately 8 weeks time and would include an updated health check on the Broadway Town Centre which had been last undertaken in 2009.
Regarding the vacant premises, five were currently under offer and one premise had interested parties but no firm offers. She advised that the council did not feel they were forcing hard working retail shops out but that turn over was a national trend and the high street was changing.
(i) Principal Landscape and Tree Officer
Councillor C.C. Pond asked the Safer, Greener and Transport Portfolio Holder to pass on appreciation to the Principal Landscape and Tree Officer who would retiring from the Council and ensured that this council was one of the leading authorities on Tree and Landscape Protection.
Councillor S. Kane indicated he would forward the comments on.
(j) Update on the Epping Parking Review
Councillor H. Whitbread asked the Safer, Greener and Transport Portfolio Holder for an update on the Epping Parking Review, particularly in relation to business permits and school parking.
Councillor S. Kane advised that North Essex Parking Partnership were finalising their report in light of comments and objections received following the initial consultation and would provide a report to their next meeting. He felt that business permits were essential to ensure that Epping High Street continued to thrive and that parking was required for shoppers, visits and commuters alike.
(k) Waltham Abbey Leisure Centre
Councillor D. Dorrell asked the Leisure and Community Services Portfolio Holder to give her impressions on the new Waltham Abbey Leisure Centre following a recent tour of the premises and whether it was on target for completion.
Councillor H. Kane advised that the facilities were excellent and the Leisure Centre would be opening on 17 November 2018. There had been £14.5million pounds invested in leisure across the district and more to come.
(l) Local Plan
Councillor S. Murray asked the Planning and Governance Portfolio Holder whether he was aware that the announcement of the submitted Local Plan would not be received well in Loughton, in particular to the proposals for Jessel Green and that this would be just the start of the process.
Councillor J. Philip advised that the Local Plan enabled the council to control where development took place and not where developers chose. If the Local Plan was to fail, developers would be able to develop anywhere with the green belt policy not being sufficient to protect the district. The National Policy Framework made it clear that more development should take place within the boundaries of built up areas and that development should be denser than it has been before, in particular, in areas close to centres of population. The council was not only required to state the amount of homes it would build but also deliver on this number, otherwise it could lose the ability to control it. He felt that the Planning Inspector would endorse the submitted Local Plan.
(m)
(n) Building Materials
Councillor K. Chana asked the Leader, why the Council was allowing the contractors to choose the types of building materials used in the Council House Building Programme, as mentioned in item 6. Question by Members Under Notice by Councillor S. Neville, when they could be stipulated.
Councillor C. Whitbread advised that in relation to Burton Road, this had been a designed and build contract, with the materials used being up to the building regulations standards required.
He advised that members were welcome to attend future Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee meetings to discuss these types of issues.
(o) Building Contractors
Councillor J. Knapman still felt concerned that the council may not have all the information required when a design and build project was allocated to a contractor.
Councillor C. Whitbread advised that he would come back to Councillor J. Knapman with more information on these types of contracts and further assurances for members on these contracts.