Archived decisions
AT A MEETING of the ENVIRONMENT POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE held on Wednesday 23 January 2002 at The Castle, Winchester.
PRESENT:
Councillors: J.K. Glen (Chairman); Mrs P.G. Banks; F.J. Bright; Mrs E.M. Byrom; J.E. Coles; A.P. Collett; C.R.H. Davidovitz; Mrs P.G. Devereux; Mrs P. Dickens; A.G. Dowden; W.J. Filer; M.S. Geddes; Mrs K. Heron; K. House; R.J. Kimber; T.G. Knight; P. Luffman; R.C. McIntosh; R.H. Price, JP; M.J. Roberts; Sir James J. Scott; K.P.J. Searle; Miss J.D. Wride.
Also in attendance: Councillor K. B. Estlin
27. MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2001 (Item 1 in the Minute Book) were confirmed by the Committee and signed as a correct record by the Chairman. At the request of Members, the outcome of reports that the Committee recommend to the Executive Member for Environment for decision would be confirmed under matters arising for future meetings.
28. REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING 2001/02
The Committee considered in detail the report of the County Treasurer, County Surveyor and the County Planning Officer (Item 2 in the Minute Book) following a summary of the report by the County Treasurer. The Executive Member for Environment was present for this item. Members raised questions in respect of a number of budget pressures that had been experienced. Clarification was also given on issues relating to Down End composting facility and the level of employer pension contributions.
29. REVENUE BUDGET 2002/03
The Committee considered in detail the report of the County Treasurer, County Surveyor and the County Planning Officer (Item 3 in the Minute Book) following a summary of the report by the County Treasurer. The Executive Member for Environment was present for this item. Members raised questions in respect of a number of the areas covered in the report.
In respect of Waste Management, further information was given as to the likely costs incurred in the disposal of abandoned vehicles and the storage and safe disposal of fridges.
There was a discussion about the budget pressures facing passenger transport services. It was reported that a one-day seminar for Members on the subject of passenger transport services would be held on Tuesday 19 March 2002, details of which would be confirmed in due course. Clarification was also given on issues relating to the School Crossing Patrol Service, Management and Support Services and service pressures in respect of Planning Services.
Members expressed particular concern that a significant proportion of the Rural Bus Services Grant was being used to fund core services.
RESOLVED:
(i) That the report be noted.
(ii) That the Environment Policy Review Committee expressed concern at the removal of 20% of the Rural Bus Services Grant to fund core services.
30. CAPITAL PROGRAMME 2002/03 TO 2005/06 AND REVISED PROGRAMME 2001/02
The Committee considered in detail the report of the County Treasurer, the County Surveyor and County Planning Officer (Item 4 in the Minute Book) following a summary of the report by the County Surveyor. The Executive Member for Environment was present for this item. A full debate ensued and the County Surveyor offered to provide further information to individual Members as requested on the Home Zones and the Chandlers Ford Railway Station.
31. UPDATE ON PASSENGER TRANSPORT
The Committee considered the report of the County Surveyor updating Members on the current position in respect of passenger transport and in particular two specific actions identified at the last meeting of the Committee namely:-
(i) that feedback be provided on the results of a planned approach to District Councils with a view to them providing support for local bus services from April 2002 in order to assist in maintaining current services.
(ii) that a working party be convened to consider the Committee's concerns.
As a result of a letter sent to District Councils in Hampshire who did not currently support bus services, the County Surveyor reported that he had received a mixed response from five District Councils, with the remaining four yet to make a substantive response.
The working party comprising Councillors Mrs Devereux, Mrs Dickens and Roberts had met on 15 January 2002. A number of issues were deliberated and in particular the working party felt it was vitally important that the seriousness of the situation was made clear to District Councils.
RESOLVED:
1. That the report be noted.
2. That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the Executive Member for Environment that a letter be sent, with some urgency, to the District Council's who had indicated the possibility that funding might be forthcoming, to a meeting to discuss the matter further.
32. A SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK: PUBLIC CONSULTATION REPORT
The Committee considered the report of the County Planning Officer (Item 6 in the Minute Book) summarising the main planning, transportation and administrative proposals in respect of a public consultation document published by the Countryside Agency. The County Planning Officer detailed the background to the report and in particular drew Members attention to paragraphs 3.2 and 3.4 of the report and the points raised within.
During the debate the view was expressed that a national park would only give added value if there was substantial additional resources and this seemed unlikely. On development control, the Committee concluded that in the interests of democratic accountability and bearing in mind the extent of the proposed national park a solution which enabled all decisions to be taken by existing local authorities would be preferable. On the boundary, and in response to a Member's proposal that Rowlands Castle be included in the proposed National Park, the County Planning Officer advised against the village and other suggested additions being submitted but he recommended a small addition at Cadlington House and that further thought be given to the boundary in Southleigh Forest.
RESOLVED:
That the Cabinet be informed that:
1. General
Designation of the South Downs as a National Park would reconfirm the landscape importance already recognised through the Areas of Outstanding National Beauty designations and emphasise the countryside recreation opportunities, but the real test of the proposed designation must be "does it add value to what is already being achieved and could be achieved by existing agencies?". The answer to the question depends on the extent to which additional resources are made available for the conservation and management of the area. In the absence of any guarantees about future resources for a proposed South Downs National Park Authority, then there is no certainty about "added value".
2. Issue 1 (Membership)
(i) The County Council is concerned at the lack of direct democratic
accountability associated with National Park Authorities.
(ii) In the absence of special arrangements to address the lack of
democratic accountability, the Countryside Agency's preferred option
for a National Park Authority of 46 members be supported.
(iii) The apportionment of County Council seats on the NPA should be
based upon the geographical area and population within the National
Park.
3. Issue 2 (Forward Planning and Development Control)
(i) Structure Plan: the Countryside Agency's preferred option (a) for
three joint Structure Plans be supported.
(ii) Minerals and Waste Local Plan: the Countryside Agency's
preferred option (a) for minerals and waste local plans to be
prepared jointly with existing authorities in each county be
supported. In view of the likely impact of National Park
designation on the sand and gravel supply for the south-east,
consideration should be given to a change in national policy on sand
and gravel extraction in the National Park to enable it to be
permitted where it would result in environmental benefits that
accord with National Park objectives.
(iii) Local Plan: the Countryside Agency's option (c) for a series of 12
Local Plans be supported, with the addition of a recommendation
for a specific chapter in each local plan addressing the National
Park.
(iv) Development Control: in the interests of democratic accountability, all
development control decisions should be made by existing local
authorities.
4. Issue 3 (A Role in Land Management)
(i) Land management generally: the role of the management plan and
its relationship to national, regional and park-wide issues be defined
by the Countryside Agency.
(ii) Farming and forestry; nature conservation; cultural heritage: the
Agency's approach be supported.
5. Issue 4 (A Role in Visitor Management)
(i) A countryside management service: the creation of a countryside
management service be supported, but only if it adds value to the
existing provision of such services.
(ii) The transfer of ownership and management of County Council
country parks and other recreational sites to the NPA should only take
place where there is a demonstrable need.
(iii) Access and rights of way: the Agency's preferred option (a) be
rejected. The legal responsibility for rights of way should remain with
the County Council, managed in partnership with the NPA.
(iv) Transport: the proposal for the active involvement of the NPA in the
preparation of the Local Transport Plan be supported. The proposal
that the NPA should deliver and implement parts of the transport
strategy covered by the park area through the delegation of powers,
resources and funding be rejected.
(v) Tourism: the NPA should take an active role in the promotion of the
park to visitors in partnership with the local authorities and tourist
boards.
6. Issue 5 (A National Park Management Plan)
(i) The National Park Management Plan is the umbrella document which
embodies the vision and policies for the National Park and its
importance should be reflected more strongly.
7. Issue 6 (Working in Partnership)
(i) The Countryside Agency's approach be supported.
8. Issue 7 (Involving Local People)
(i) The Countryside Agency's approach be supported.
9. Draft Boundary
The draft boundary of the South Downs National Park as proposed by the Countryside Agency be supported, with the exception of the areas referred to in paragraphs 4.8 to 4.20 of this report, together with the addition of Cadlington House, Blendworth Lodge and associated park/grounds and a re-assessment of the boundary through Southleigh Forest.
33. TRANSPORT NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS REVIEW - COVERING REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ON OUTCOMES
The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive and County Surveyor (Item 7 in the Minute Book) summarising the deliberations and final considerations of the Steering Group and stakeholders who had contributed to the Best Value Review. The Chairman extended his thanks to those Members who had taken part in the Challenge Workshops.
RESOLVED:
1. That the outcome report for the Best Value review of Transport Network Improvements be agreed, noting the specific improvement areas identified:
(i) continuing to find more effective ways of procuring the service through a mixture of internal and external resources;
(ii) developing a project team culture throughout all project contributors, cemented through better project inception;
(iii) developing better methods of feedback and learning to improve project management and staff development;
(iv) identifying and agreeing more effective means of dialogue with stakeholders and, in particular, integrate this with an improved level of involvement with the local elected members at all stages for project development;
(v) making financial decisions better informed on long-term and external cost implications; and
(vi) integrating continuous improvement and innovation into the Quality Assurance system.
2. That a summary of the review is prepared in the standard format for inclusion in the Best Value Performance Plan.
3. That a copy of the above summary and the Improvement Plan are provided to the Executive Member to effect implementation of the review outcomes.
4. That arrangements are made for the Policy Review Committee to receive an annual progress report on the Improvement Plan, to be considered in each January, starting from 2003, to facilitate reporting in the Best Value Performance Plan.
34. BEST VALUE IMPROVEMENT PLAN - ROAD SAFETY SERVICES
RESULTS OF BEST VALUE INSPECTORATE DESKTOP AUDIT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN MONITORING UPDATE
The Committee considered the report of the County Surveyor (Item 8 in the Minute Book). A full discussion ensued and Members questions were answered. In particular, Members expressed general concern that road users views be taken into account in the area of safety.
RESOLVED:
1. That the findings of the Best Value Inspectorate's Desktop Audit of the County Council's Road Safety Services be welcomed.
2. That the Executive Member for Environment be advised of the recommended changes and updating of the Service Improvement (Action) Plans for the County Council's Road Safety Education, Training and Publicity and Safety Auditing services.
3. That the updated content of the County Council's Best Value Performance Plan, concerning road safety services, be included when the full plan is submitted to the County Council for approval.
35 STREET LIGHTING POLICY
The Committee considered the report of the County Surveyor (Item 9 in the Minute Book) detailing revisions to the Street Lighting Policy.
RESOLVED:
That the revised Street Lighting Policy be submitted to the Executive Member for Environment for approval.
36 WINCHESTER MOVEMENT AND ACCESS PLAN - A REVIEW
The Committee considered a report of the County Surveyor (Item 10 in the Minute Book) providing an outline of the Winchester Movement and Access Plan and reviewing progress to date since the publication of the Hampshire Local Transport Plan 2001-2006.
RESOLVED:
That the Winchester Movement and Access Plan strategy and programme be endorsed.
37 PLANNING: DELIVERING A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE - THE PLANNING GREEN PAPER
The Committee considered the report of the County Planning Officer (Item 11 in the Minute Book). A seminar for Members on the Planning Green Paper was held on Friday 18 January 2002 and the County Planning Officer thanked all of those who had attended.
Concern was expressed at the proposals set out in the Green Paper to take away County Councils role as strategic planners for their areas and thus excluding County Councillors from the planning process.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the incorporation of detailed points made by Members during the course of the discussions as appropriate, and such further refinements as may be considered necessary by the County Planning Officer, a report be present to Cabinet which recommends that in it s response to the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions the County Council:
1. In principle supports the intention to:
(i) streamline the planning process;
(ii) encourage community engagement;
(iii) revise the scope and content of national planning policy guidelines;
(iv) reform selected development control procedures and strengthen planning enforcement procedures;
(v) accepts that development plans in their current form should be abolished; and
(vi) supports, in principle, the concept of statutory Regional Spatial Strategies, Local Development Frameworks and Action Plans.
2. Suggests there are powerful and compelling reasons for County Councils to have responsibility for the preparation of county-wide and sub-regional Local Development Frameworks not only to ensure the necessary cross-boundary integration of land use, transport and other social and community services, but also to enable a body of skills, knowledge and experience to be maintained to inform local, regional and European plan-making, implementation and conservation initiatives.
3. Cautions against any changes that would either undermine the role of democratically elected members, in particular by transferring responsibility for the local interpretation of national and regional planning policy to un-elected or remote regional planning agencies.
4. Suggests that if speeding up the planning process is a key aim, then more thought needs to be given to the framework for community engagement so that it is confined to relevant comments at appropriate stages of the process.
5. Advises that the County Council and its strategic and minerals and waste planning partners will continue to expedite the review of the Hampshire County Structure Plan and the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan within the general framework for policies outlined in the Green Paper.
38 SUSTAINABLE SUBURBS STUDY
The Committee considered the report of the County Planning Officer (Item 12 in the Minute Book) detailing the main findings of the recently published Sustainable Suburbs Studies and how matters could be taken forward as reflected in the resolutions.
RESOLVED:
That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the Executive Member for Environment to consider the issues raised in the `Sustainable Suburbs Studies' and to agree to take these matters forward by:-
(i) investigating the availability of funding for environmental improvements in Lee-on-the-Solent;
(ii) implementing priority actions identified in the summary of the Sustainable Suburbs Studies document for North Camp utilising funds set aside in the 2001/2003 Regeneration of Older Urban Areas Programme;
(iii) identifying new areas that require action in Hampshire; and
(iv) raising the profile of suburban issues and the work that the County Council is undertaking in these areas with all levels of Government and other interest groups.
39. ENVIRONMENT POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE - FORWARD PLAN
The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive, County Surveyor and County Planning Officer detailing suggested items for future discussion. The report was noted.
40. DATE, TIME AND VENUE FOR NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee would be held on Wednesday 6 March 2002 at 10.00am in the Conference Room, Ashburton Court, The Castle, Winchester.
8AM19102