Meeting documents

To sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2016.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2016 were agreed as a correct record and were signed by the Chairman.

There were no declarations of interest.

At the previous meeting the Committee received a report which provided information regarding the recycling performance of the joint waste contract.

Regular update reports on this topic were requested for future meetings. Members were particularly keen to understand what progress had been made on the provision of a recycling guide explaining which bin to use for different waste streams. For example, residents were often unsure which bin to use to dispose of old light bulbs.

RESOLVED:

1.      That the 28 Day Notice for the Cabinet meeting on 13 December 2016 be noted.

2.      That regular update reports on the recycling performance of the joint waste contract be received by the Services Overview Committee.

The Committee received a report providing information on the performance of Council services against performance indicators and service objectives between July and September 2016.

Further detail was requested explaining why the target for the percentage of calls to the ICT helpdesk that were resolved within agreed timescales had been missed.

Members were pleased to note the overall performance of the Council.

RESOLVED:

That the performance report be noted.

The Committee received a report attaching the Councils’ proposed temporary accommodation framework. The framework had been developed following a recent case at the Supreme Court which required all Councils to have a clear statement on how it secured and allocated temporary accommodation.

Members felt the document provided useful information such as the high demand for temporary accommodation. It was noted that appeals on officer decisions relating to homelessness applications were then reviewed by the Council’s Appeals and Complaints Committee. Any further appeal would be considered by the High Court. In response to a question it was noted that the Homelessness policy and guidance was updated following any changes to case law.

In response to questions from the Committee, it was noted that the Council aimed to move homeless households on to alternative self-contained accommodation as soon as possible, but within 6 weeks. This could be longer in exceptional circumstances, for example whilst an appeal was being determined. On average 30 units of temporary accommodation were in use at one time. Occasionally the Council had to use bed and breakfast accommodation, but this would only be in certain circumstances.

One Member referred to a recent fire and queried why a local family had been split up and provided with temporary accommodation in different locations. In response it was noted that the Council allocated temporary accommodation based on what was available, and sometimes, due to a shortage of larger 4 bed properties, it was necessary to split larger families up.

The Council aimed to prevent homelessness as much as possible. It also had a target to deliver 33 additional units of affordable housing this year. An Affordable Housing Members Working Group had also been set up to look at identifying sites for additional affordable housing.

RESOLVED:

That the draft Cabinet report be noted.

Members considered a report that presented a summary of the greenhouse gas emissions for the Council which would be published on the Council’s website. It was noted that there had been an increase in emissions in comparison to the previous year particularly due to high occupancy of King George V House. This was partly offset by the generation of electricity from the building’s photo voltaic panels.

In response to a question regarding the reintroduction of recording diesel, as well as petrol, for staff mileage claims, it was noted that an officer steering group would be setup to look at developing a sustainable development strategy. The group would aim to put in place CO₂ reducing actions. It was anticipated that the strategy would be in place by Autumn 2017, however, some actions could be implemented more quickly.

A report had recently been considered by the Corporate Asset Management Group considering an increase in car park capacity at King George V House. It was suggested that if any trees were removed from the car park that they be replaced elsewhere to ensure the Council leads by example in promoting environmental protection.

Regarding the drop in electricity generated from the Council’s photo voltaic (PV) panels it was noted that following investigation it had been identified that some of the PV panels on Chesham leisure centre were not working correctly and these had since been reinstalled.

During the discussion it was identified that because the Council was responsible for all emissions that derived from any of the Council’s operations, the majority of the Council’s CO₂ emissions were from the Council’s leisure centres and the contractor’s waste collection vehicles. In response to questions, the Committee were reassured that the proposed new leisure centre (Minute 22 refers), if built, would be required to meet current green standards. The Council also had in place a programme for the replacement of waste collection vehicles, and the new vehicles would be required to meet the current environmental and efficiency standards. The current requirement was to have a Euro 6 engine.

Members also reported that there had been litter from plastic bottles along Stanley Hill, Amersham, which Members had witnessed falling from a bulk waste transport vehicle. There was also litter accumulating outside the depot. It was noted that the site would be subject to checks by the Environment Agency, and Members were asked to pass on vehicle registration details to the County Council so that they could follow this up with their contractor.

Members also highlighted that litter was dispersed when grass cutting took place along the A413 in particular. It was noted that the Council was responsible for litter collection, and that grass cutting schedules were requested from the County Council in advance so that both activities could be synchronised, where possible.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To note and comment on the report considered by Cabinet on 1 November 2016.

Paragraph 3 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The Committee received a report that had been considered by the Cabinet at a meeting held on 1 November 2016, which provided an update on the outcome of the Chiltern Pools Feasibility Study, and sought agreement to undertake a public consultation to test the key findings that were being recommended. It was noted that the Cabinet had agreed at the meeting held on 1 November 2016 to undertake an informed public consultation to assess public opinion on the development of a new community / leisure facility and identify gaps in leisure provision and the associated funding for this.

During the discussion the following key points were made:

The potential new facility would be required to meet environmental standards and be built to a high standard of quality. Technology such as photo voltaic panels, ground source heat pumps, air recirculation and combined heat and power could help to achieve this.

The list of proposed facilities was developed in light of evidence on the leisure needs of the area and potential income. There was a discussion on the anticipated popularity of different facilities, including squash courts and flumes. The public consultation would inform the proposals.

The Council was working hard to encourage responses to the public consultation. This included leafleting and canvassing high street shopping areas and promotion through the local press.

Members were keen to encourage all stakeholders to respond to the consultation, but community groups, particularly those that already use the current facilities were identified as being very important in helping to inform the proposals. It was noted that all community groups would be consulted.

Members had received views from community groups regarding maintaining the leisure and community provision whilst the proposed new facility was built. It was noted that, whilst much of the detail was pending the outcome of the public consultation and would form part of the next stage of the project, the construction of the proposed new facility would be arranged in a way that ensured that community needs continued to be met. Community groups were therefore key stakeholders for developing the proposals. No decision had been made on the future use of the current site if a new facility was built.

It was suggested that the community zone be located on the ground floor for accessibility reasons. It was noted that the potential new facility would need to meet building regulations, accessibility requirements, and the community space would be larger than the current provision.

Councillor J MacBean advised that she was on the Chesham Elgiva Board, and highlighted that there were similarities in service provision between the Elgiva and the proposed new facility. It was considered important that the proposed new facility complemented the provision of other local community facilities, rather than compete with facilities such as the Elgiva. Information sharing and encouraging responses to the public consultation were therefore important.

Following a discussion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.