To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor D. B. Wilcox as Cabinet Member (Highways and Transportation).

To receive any details of Members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the Committee.

There were no substitutes.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 26th September, 2005.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 26th September, 2005 be approved and signed by the Chairman.

To consider suggestions from members of the public on issues the Committee could scrutinise in the future.

(Please refer to the Public Information pages in this agenda)

No suggested areas for scrutiny were raised by members of the public.

To note progress upon the preparation of the Council Biodiversity Strategic Framework and actions in hand to support related activity.

The Committee was informed of progress upon the preparation of the Council’s Biodiversity Strategic Framework and actions in hand to support related activity.

At the June 2005 meeting the Committee received a report setting out the strategic objectives which would form the basis of a framework for the Council’s work in relation to biodiversity conservation.  While work on preparing the Statement was proceeding, a delay had occurred to take advantage of funding opportunities and to assess the implications of new advice in relation to biodiversity conservation, as set out in more detail in the report.

The Committee received a short presentation on ‘Herefordshire Lifescape’. The Committee heard that the Council had recently completed the pilot project, which had been substantially funded from external sources (LEADER+ and English Nature) to investigate how biodiversity and landscape potential might be promoted to local communities.

The Committee noted that while a lot of good environmental work had been carried out on the river Monnow, that area had not been included as the project had been based on the landscape included in the LEADER+ scheme, namely the valleys of the rivers Arrow, Frome, Lugg and Wye.  While data was collected on footpaths, no biodiversity guidance had been issued to landowners.  There were however, plans to place a toposcope at Coleshill.  No adverse comments had been received during the community input stage to the project concerning green lane use by four-wheel drive vehicles.  However, the current project covered a limited area of the County and it was thought that comments may be received when the project was expanded to other areas following the recent funding agreement with the Forestry Commission.  Guidance arising from the project produced for specific Parishes would be distributed for information to Members of the Committee.

Questioned on whether the Lifescape project was giving value for money the Committee noted that the Council had drawn in funding from a number of different sources, was working with other partners in this subject and that the data collected would provide evidence that the County was improving its biodiversity conservation.

RESOLVED: That the report on issues being considered for inclusion in the Biodiversity Conservation Strategic Framework be noted.

To consider whether revisions are needed to the code of practice in the light of experience through the growing season of 2005.

The Committee considered whether revisions were needed to the Code of Practice for the use of Polytunnels in Herefordshire in light of experience through the growing season of 2005.

The Head of Planning Services reported that following consideration by this Committee in June 2004, the decision by Cabinet in October 2004 to approve the Code of Practice provided for it to be reviewed in two years time i.e. in 2006.  This decision further required that an update position in respect of the application of the Code be reported to Cabinet and the Environment Scrutiny Committee on an annual basis.  His report was therefore made at an interim stage with the intention of updating the Committee as to progress.  His report briefly outlined the history of the issue; the number of planning applications received for polytunnels; the number of notifications in accordance with the Code of Practice; enforcement issues and case law, including public local inquiries. The report also highlighted that as part of the new development plan system (the Local Development Framework), pre application consultation could be requested through the forthcoming Statement of Community Involvement, the principals of which the Code was in accordance with.  He commented that the outcome of the two public local inquiries (Brierley Court, Herefordshire and at Waverley Borough Council, Surrey) may help establish the planning basis for the control of polytunnels.

The Director commented upon the difficult issue of balancing the need for a successful agricultural economy with the environmental concerns expressed by campaigners against polytunnels.  In the absence of a definitive legal definition for when polytunnels came within planning control the Code of Practice was the best available means of control.

In response to a question concerning the volume of traffic generated by this type of agricultural operation, particularly in narrow country lanes, Councillor K.G. Grumbley suggested that Section 3 bullet point 2 of the Code be amended to read: “The grower will submit local and landscape impact statements accompanied by mitigation measures.  The local impact statement should specify, as a minimum, the proposed vehicular routing, volume and type of traffic.  Mitigation measures may include one-way routes, hardening of passing places or surface improvements.  Routing should be included on the location plan (Checklist item 9).  Landscape impact mitigation may include the use of less reflective or coloured polythene.”  Having heard legal advice concerning the criteria for making Traffic Regulation Orders the Committee debated the suggestion and noted the current intention to get growers to co-operate in implementing mitigation measures.  It was proposed that the issue merited further consideration by the Cabinet Member (Environment).

Questioned on the speed of securing compliance with the Code the Cabinet Member (Environment) stated that once instances of non-compliance were identified the appropriate enforcement action was undertaken, however, with further resources, Planning Services could be more proactive in both enforcement of and guidance in relation to the Code.

Issues concerning any adverse effect on the economy of the County, in particular tourism, and the use of new technology would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To advise Members on the progress of the 2005/06 Capital Programme for Environment Areas within the overall context of the Herefordshire Council Capital Programme.

The Committee was advised of progress with regard to the 2005/06 Environment Capital Programme within the context of the Herefordshire Council Capital Programme.

The Assistant County Treasurer reported that the total of the Capital Programme had decreased from £13,461,000 notified to the previous meeting to £12,047,000 being a net reduction of £1,414,000.  The project in relation to City Centre Enhancements for £2,000,000 had been transferred to the Economic Development Capital Programme.  A number of other minor changes had increased the programme by £586,000.  The current Capital programme was indicated at appendix 1 to the report.

In response to a question concerning transfers between Capital and Revenue budgets at the time of the last budget round, particularly in relation to the revised forecast figure of £4,843,000 for Capitalised Maintenance of Principal Roads, the Director of Environment confirmed that the revised forecast figure was as printed and clarified the general budgetary position in this context.

The Committee noted that the specific expenditure heading for Vehicle Activated Signs may be phased out as this type of sign should be considered and if necessary included in any individual speed reduction scheme.

RESOLVED that the position set out in the Capital Budget Monitoring report be noted.

To advise Members of the revenue budget monitoring position for the Environment Programme Area budgets for the period to 30^th September 2005. 

The Committee was advised of the latest budget monitoring position for the Environment programme area revenue budgets for the period to 30th September, 2005.  The report listed variations against budget at this stage of the year.

The Director of Environment and the Assistant County Treasurer reported the current budgetary position and highlighted a potential overspend in relation to winter and road maintenance.  While car parking income looked likely to exceed its target by £200,000 a shortfall of £30,000 was expected in income from de-criminalised parking.  With the forthcoming renegotiation of contracts for public transport an overspend of £35,000 was expected in 2005/6 rising to £250,000 on 2006/7.  It was expected that some of the additional costs could be mitigated by the increase in car parking income.  Anticipated over-expenditure on Street Cleansing (£160,000) and public toilets (£50,000) would be contained within the Highways and Transport budgets by the reallocation of resources.  It was expected that expenditure on Licensing would exceed income by £50,000 as the income received had not come up to expectations.

The Waste Disposal P.F.I contract budget was expected to break even after taking into account the virement to Homelessness in 2005/06.  The position was worse than 2004/05 due to the increased proportion of the contract (i.e. up to 25.7% from 24.77%) being borne by the Council and a reduction in the amount received for P.F.I. credits because of a change in the charging basis being used. 

Building Control and Development fee income was above budget by approximately £280,000.  However, it was anticipated that the target income would be exceeded by £200,000 for the year.  £304,000 of the Planning Delivery Grant had been brought forward into 2005/6.

The Committee noted the report that in the event of a standard winter, highway winter maintenance costs could exceed the budget by £200,000   On questioning this position the Committee were informed that a £108,000 reserve could be used to support any shortfall and in the event of a particularly bad winter the Government’s ‘Bellwin Scheme’ could be called on however, certain criteria would need to be met.

RESOLVED: That the position set out in the Environment Revenue Budget Monitoring report be noted.

To report the remaining actions and the exceptions to the programmed progress in the improvement plans resulting from the reviews of Commercial Enforcement, Development Control, Public Conveniences, and Public Rights of Way.

The Committee received a report on the remaining actions and exceptions to the programmed progress in the improvement plans resulting from the Best Value Reviews (BVR) of Development Control, Public Conveniences and Public Rights of Way, detailed at Appendix 2 to the report.

Following consideration of the Best Value Review of Commercial Enforcement - Stage 3 report at its meeting on 6th June 2005, the Committee considered the draft improvement plan for the Service prior to being finalised by the Cabinet Member (Environment) for implementation.  The draft Improvement plan was attached to the report at appendix 1.

Following concerns regarding performance against BVR performance indicators relating to planning applications determined within specified timescales, an action plan had been drawn up and progress against these actions was indicated in appendix 3 to the report.

RESOLVED: That the report on the implementation of improvement plans (Appendix 2), including the draft improvement plan for Commercial Enforcement (Appendix 1) and the action plan relating to planning applications (Appendix 3) be noted.

To update Members on the exceptions to the targeted progress made by the Environment Directorate for the six months April to September 2005 towards achieving the performance indicators / targets which appear in the Council’s Corporate Plan and are reported bi-monthly.

The Committee was updated on the exceptions to the targeted progress made by the Environment Directorate for the six months April to September 2005 towards achieving the performance indicators/targets which appear in the Council’s Corporate Plan. 

The Director of Environment highlighted that the performance target for BV165 – percentage of pedestrian crossings with facilities for disabled people – had changed in that crossing places at road junctions now needed to be included.  The Directorate were currently struggling to achieve the revised target.  Also in relation to this target the Committee noted that arising from the delay to the Commercial Road resurfacing programme, currently programmed for 2005/2006, works would be undertaken to footway, cycle and bus facilities at the location.  The provision of a box junction at the Commercial Road / Stonebow Road junction would be investigated.

Referring to the ‘Kilometres of rural footway constructed’ target the Committee noted that the 2.01km achieved so far related to the Roman Road scheme.  The Committee was informed that a footway scheme at Bodenham, which had been temporarily held up due to compulsory purchase issues, was about to commence.

Commenting on the planning targets the Director of Environment reported that generally, staffing levels had recovered and the action plan referred to in minute No 36 – Best Value Reviews – would address outstanding issues.  He commented that when compared with the recent high number of planning applications the numbers were now showing signs of reducing.  He also reported that during discussions with the Audit Commission the Commission had commented that, compared with other authorities, Planning Services were providing planning guidance on applications too early in the planning process.  This issue would be reconsidered, however, he warned that if the Service limited the guidance given to final submission stage the Services may be accused of a reduction in the level of service.

RESOLVED: that subject to the comments detailed above, the report on the Monitoring of 2005/2006 Performance Indicators – April 2005 to September 2005 be noted.