Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Councillor Collins and Councillor Serluca was in attendance as substitute.

At this point Members must declare whether they have an interest, whether personal or prejudicial, in any of the items on the agenda. Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.

The following declarations of interest were made:

Item 5 – Portfolio Progress Report From Cabinet Members Relevant to the Committee

As the report had made reference to planning services Councillor Todd and Councillor Burton declared personal interests in that they were members of the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee.

The minutes of the Strong and Supportive Communities Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 15 September 2010 were approved as an accurate record.

The decision notice for each decision will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision may then be implemented on the expiry of 3 working days after the publication of the decision (not including the date of publication), unless a request for call-in of the decision is received from any two Members of a Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commissions.  If a request for call-in of a decision is received, implementation of the decision remains suspended for consideration by the relevant Scrutiny Committee or Commission.

There were no requests for Call-in to consider.

• Cabinet Member for Housing, Neighbourhoods and Planning
• Cabinet Member for Business Engagement

Councillor Hiller, Cabinet Member for Housing, Neighbourhoods & Planning and Councillor Elsey, Cabinet Member for Business Engagement attended the meeting and spoke to the Committee about the progress that had been made on their relevant portfolios.  The report had informed the Committee of updates in planning services, neighbourhood services and transport and engineering which came under the remit of Councillor Hiller and the Visitor Destination Centre, retail businesses, CCTV and recent events held across the city which fell under the remit of Councillor Elsey.

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

·         In relation to the A15/Junction 8 improvement works Councillor Hiller was asked to brief the Committee on what type of traffic lights would be put in place at the roundabout?    There would be a sequential set of traffic lights in place which would also link into the Garden Park traffic lights and would be tested prior to going live. The improvement works had increased the lanes at the junction from two to three and four lanes. There would also be a staggered pedestrian crossing to allow pedestrians from the Dogsthorpe area to travel safely to the Garden Park area.

·         Councillor Hiller was also asked for an update on the latest situation regarding the residents of Finchfield who had concerns about the noise coming from the junction?    A public meeting had been held and it was agreed that a noise barrier would be installed along the area of the road where it widened.  Consultation with the residents was continuing.

·         There was mention in the budget report about replacing the traffic lights in Bright Street.  It also mentioned switching lights off at night to save energy.  Could Councillor Hiller comment on this and advise if these lights would be switched off at night.   Paul Phillips informed Members that the Bright Street traffic lights were one of the oldest sets of traffic lights in the city and would be replaced with sequential traffic lights. It was possible that the new style of lights would have provision to alter in the way they work.  Switching the lights off would be a road safety issue as it would mean raising awareness to the public that they would not be on all the time and this would have to be looked into.

·         Members congratulated the Cabinet Member on the installation of the new signalised junction at the Morrison’s Store.  There had however been some concerns from a resident that the existing pedestrian crossing near to Morrison’s was to be removed.  The Cabinet Member and Director of Operations were not aware of this and would find out and report back to the Committee.

·         Who would pay for the remedial work still to be completed on the A1073 Spalding to Eye Improvement Scheme?  The contractors Morgan Sindall were charged with handing over a road that was fit for purpose before it was signed off for use.  The contractors would therefore pay for the work to be done.

·         The Care and Repair service would not be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Karen Kibblewhite, the Community Safety & Substance Misuse Manager introduced the report.  The report informed the Committee about six areas of the City which were being considered for Designated Public Places Orders (DPPO) with a proposal that four of the six orders go ahead.  The six areas being considered had gone out to consultation to the Parish Councils, residents and relevant ward councillors. 

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

·         Why was the Pyramid Centre, Bretton not being recommended for a DPPO?  The number of anti social behaviour incidents logged in that area was 76 but only five had been alcohol related.  There was some additional work being done to tackle the anti social behaviour by other means.

·         Members noted that when consulting with residents groups in the areas being considered for DPPOs, only 8 out of the 10 groups consulted had responded.  The Chair pointed out that a great deal of consultation had already taken place at the Neighbourhood Panel meetings and therefore residents may have felt that they had already given their views. 

·         How big was the problem of alcohol drinking in the city?  The officer informed Members that it was no more than any other comparable city.

RECOMMENDATION

To endorse the proposed Designated Public Places Orders for

a.              Church Drive, Orton Waterville

b.              Millfield and New England

c.              Dogsthorpe

d.              Eastfield Road

and to recommend their adoption to Full Council.

Graeme Clark and Jocelyn Cunningham, Director of Creative Learning from Royal Society of Arts (RSA) and the RSA lead on the arts and social change strand, presented the report.    Citizens Power was an initial two year funded programme looking to bring people together to shape the future of the City and build connections between people and the places where they lived.   There were seven strands which looked at new ways in which people could be supported and encouraged to make a positive difference within their communities. 

Arts and Social Change looked at the way creative arts could develop a sense of belonging and pride within the City of Peterborough. It would support local people and key figures to understand the needs and build joint aspirations. ideas and solutions to tackle the challenges the City faced today.  This was the biggest strand and covered five elements.

Social media was about developing an online platform which would connect different people from different communities and improve community participation.  The long term goal was to have a network of sustainable community websites that were owned and developed by local people.

Councillor Goldspink had submitted a list of questions prior to the meeting to obtain further information and a written response to these had been provided.    Officers welcomed the questions and advised the Committee that the questions had enabled them to examine every component of the report.

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

·         Members commented that the report was not detailed enough and not in plain English. 

·         A budget of £199,914 had been allocated to Peterborough Core and officers were asked to explain what Peterborough Core was.  Peterborough Core was about managing communications, attendance at meetings and bringing the seven strands together and provided the core funding to bring all these links together.

·         The officers were asked to explain in plain English what “to inform the processes employed across all aspects of Citizen Power in order to understand how arts interventions impact upon attachment, participation and innovation” meant.    The three underpinning ideas of Citizens Power related to improving levels of attachment and belonging to the City. Informing the process was saying that this kind of work, arts and creativity would inform all the ways of working that citizen’s power would have. 

·         What was the process of selecting people to get involved in the projects and avoiding the usual suspects who were already engaged with the Council?  The ‘Take me to’ engagement project provided an open invitation to all people and it was hoped that people who would not normally get involved but did excellent community work would be identified or come forward.

·         What was the total cost of this project for Peterborough City Council?  The Council had committed £125,000 for each of the next two years for this project.  The programme would continue to evolve and may attract further funding but the Council’s contribution would remain at £125,000 for each of the next two years.

·         In the current budgetary climate were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Julie Rivett, Neighbourhoods and Community Engagement Strategic Manager introduced the report.  The report informed the Committee of the progress made by the Neighbourhood Councils during their first year of operation, key issues which had been identified and suggestions for moving forward and addressing those issues.  Julie Rivett corrected an error in the report with regard to the section on financial responsibility which should have stated that the Neighbourhood pool would be 35% and the Strategic Pool 65%.

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

·         Had officers considered going out to meet the public directly rather than asking them to come to meetings?  It was suggested that meeting places could include pubs or that raising awareness could take place in such places as shopping centres and supermarkets.  It was recognised that our engagement strategy needed to be much more user friendly. What also needed to be recognised were all the other things that happened in between the Neighbourhood Council meetings and our engagement that under pinned that. All suggestions would be welcomed.

·         Adrian Chapman informed Members that the meetings had been formulaic which meant less flexibility for creative ways of engaging. Outside of the meetings residents were being engaged through street surgeries and at other venues of their choice at convenient times to suit them.  He invited the Scrutiny Committee to help develop neighbourhood councils in a way that would enable them to engage with people in a more flexible way.

·         Councillor Sandford was concerned that the £25,000 allocated to each Neighbourhood Council was being reduced to zero and would instead be allocated from the planning obligations scheme. He felt that that would create a very hit and miss situation if a Neighbourhood Council happened to be in one of the more established areas of the city where they could end up getting very little funding compared to an area where there was a major housing development where there could be quite significant funding. He asked if any calculations had been carried out to show what the total amount of money going to each Neighbourhood Council would have been if this had been implemented 12 months ago and would it have been an increase on the £25,000 or a cut. Calculations had not been made and going forward there would be a need to ensure best use of the money from planning obligations.

·         When Neighbourhood Councils were first introduced the proposal was that they would have significant decision making powers to enable them to make decisions which affected particular areas but this had not happened.  They were also to be delegated with a significant amount from the revenue budget of the Council but as soon as there were financial difficulties the Council wanted to take the funding away.  Adrian Chapman felt that in the current economic difficulties the role of Neighbourhood Councils should be even more important.  Adrian advised Members that he  would like to carry out a full review of Neighbourhood Councils and to redraft their Terms of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Committee received the latest version of the Council’s Forward Plan, containing key decisions that the Leader of the Council anticipated the Cabinet or individual Cabinet Members would make during the course of the following four months.  Members were invited to comment on the Plan and, where appropriate, identify any relevant areas for inclusion in the Committee’s work programme. 

ACTION AGREED

The Committee noted the Forward Plan and agreed that there were no items for further consideration.

Members considered the Committee’s Work Programme for 2010/11 and discussed possible items for inclusion.

ACTION AGREED

To confirm the work programme for 2010/11 and the Scrutiny Officer to make any amendments as discussed during the meeting.

·         Citizens Power Programme Project Initiation Document to be added to the January agenda.

Wednesday 19 January 2010

19 January 2011