Venue: Microsoft Teams
Contact: Miss C Tuohy (0116 305 5483). Email: cat.tuohy@leics.gov.uk
Note: Please Note: This meeting will not be open to the public in line with Government advice on public gatherings. This meeting will be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council's Youtube Channel:- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWFpwBLs6MnUzG0WjejrQtQ
No. | Item |
---|---|
In attendance. Mr. B. Pain CC,
Deputy Leader of the Council Mr. T. Pendleton CC, Lead Member for Highways and
Transportation Mr. O. O’Shea JP CC
Cabinet Support Member. |
|
Minutes: That the minutes of
the meeting held on 3 September were
taken as read, confirmed and signed. |
|
Question Time. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 34. |
|
Questions asked by members. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that questions
had been received from Mr Hunt CC under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). Mr Hunt asked the
following questions of the Chairman:- A. Wildflower
Verge Schemes “How many schemes
have been agreed under the Leicestershire County Council Wildflower Verge
scheme so far, with which Parish and District Councils commencing on what
dates?” The Chairman replied as follows:-
The Wildflower
Verge scheme last year proved very successful with 12 parishes taking part
resulting in wildflower verges being produced in Broughton Astley, Sileby, Thurlaston, Sheepy Magna, Barkby & Barkbythorpe, Great Easton, Mountsorrel, Hallaton, Fleckney, Thurnby, Birstall and Kirby Muxloe. This year’s scheme
is now open with the application deadline of 27th November
2020. We have already received expressions of interest from 12 parishes including Barlestone, East Goscote, Houghton on the Hill, Wymeswold,
Glenfield, Countesthorpe, Hemington, Swinford, Glen Parva, Barrow upon Soar, Desford and Blaby.
All locations will be assessed for suitability ready to be included in the
grass cutting schedule starting March 2021. B.
“Resources and Waste Strategy & Recovery Standard
(R1) for Energy from Waste Treatment 1.
A paper came to committee in March 2019 outlining the
Government’s Resources and Waste Strategy; has there been any significant
development of the strategy since and if so, where should we look to update
ourselves? The Chairman replied as follows:-
Government have taken forward
commitments laid out in the Resources and Waste Strategy (released in December
2018). This includes consulting on major reforms to the way waste is managed,
such as by introducing a deposit return scheme for drinks containers, extending
producer responsibility for packaging and consistent recycling collections. The
second round of consultations with further detail on these is expected in March
2021 but the date is yet to be confirmed. Leicestershire County Council
responded to the first round in May 2019. Government are seeking new powers
through the Environment Bill to provide the legislative framework to realise the proposals to reform the waste system. This
Environment Bill is now being considered again by a Public Bill Committee which
is scheduled to report by Tuesday 1 December 2020. Further information can be
found here; https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2019-21/environment.html 2.
Amongst other detail the paper referred to: “the Government’s long term
ambition is to maximise the amount of waste sent to recycling instead of
incineration and landfill. They intend to drive greater efficiency of Energy
from Waste (EfW) plants …” (para 34); would this
include the move to Recovery over Disposal characterised
by so-called R1 operations as opposed to D10
operations for residual waste treatment? The Chairman replied as follows:-
The
majority of recently constructed Energy from Waste
facilities, for treating residual waste, are designed to achieve the standards
required to be considered a Recovery (R1) operation. These modern
facilities generally can achieve such status through solely generating
electricity from the burning of the waste, but significant amounts of waste
heat are also generated from the process. Further
efficiencies, are being encouraged by the Government, through supporting
the capture of this heat and utilising it for
beneficial purposes. Examples of such Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
facilities exist in Nottingham and Sheffield where the heat is utilised in “District Heating Networks”. 3.
I understand that to be classed as an R1 operation a
waste treatment process (eg EfW/Incinerator)
must meet the following criteria: ·
The combustion of waste must generate more energy than the consumption of
energy by the process itself; ·
The greater part of the waste must be consumed during the operation; · The greater ... view the full minutes text for item 17. |
|
Urgent Items. Minutes: There were no urgent items for consideration. |
|
Declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda. Minutes: The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting. No declarations were made. |
|
Declarations of the Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16. Minutes: There were no
declarations of the party whip. |
|
Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 35. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 36. |
|
Environment and Transport Annual Performance Report 2019/2020. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee
considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport and the Chief
Executive on Environment and Transport’s Annual Performance Report 2019/2020. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 8’ is filed with
these minutes. Arising from the
discussion the following points were noted:- i.
The
percentage of the ‘unclassified road network requiring maintenance had
increased from 15% in 2018/19 to 16% in 2019/20. Unclassified roads
made up 56% of the Council’s road network and the deterioration reflected the
lack of investment over several years. Unclassified roads tended to have lower
category function in the road network and were used for more local journeys.
Despite this overall satisfaction with the condition of highways had improved
from 29% to 35%. ii.
Despite a small decrease in ‘municipal
waste sent to landfill’ from 33.8% 2018/19 to 32.2% in 2019/20 the indicator
remained in the fourth quartile of performance and missed its 30% target. The
Department continued to see higher levels of waste in part due to the failure
of the Cotesbach Mechanical Biological Treatment facility. It was anticipated
that the position would improve in future years once procurement was completed
for 60,000 tonnes of waste for a non-landfill solution, as well as from
increased waste tonnages sent to the Coventry Energy from Waste Facility. iii.
In regard to
the speed camera scheme, the Department continued to lobby HM Treasury without
success. Members were assured that the Council would continue to lobby
Government to allow the County Council to retain fines to pay for the costs of
camera roll out. iv.
Leicester City Council had been awarded
funding for air quality as data had identified to Government that it was an
area of concern. The County Council however, had no funding as districts
managed the air quality management areas. The Council would work with districts
to look at areas where improvements could be made. v.
Performance of ’footpaths and other
rights of way that were signposted and easy to use’ also fell from 77% to 74.5%
below the 75% target. The Department only had a small budget for maintenance of
such paths despite the size of the network, meaning it was challenging to
address all problems. vi.
Members welcomed the commitment to
bring a report in 2021 to address concerns regarding natural capital and
biodiversity. vii.
As a result of
Covid-19 the Council had created a booking system for Recycling and Household
Waste Sites appointments. This had a marked benefit in allowing the sites to
remain open and in managing the flow through sites. Since its introduction, the number of appointments residents could make
had increased from once fortnightly to three per fortnight. The Council was
also in the process of exploring the possibility of on the day booking. viii.
‘Average speed on A roads’ was an
indicator set by the Department for Transport which allowed the Council to
compare itself with other areas. It was acknowledged that it might not be the
most ideal way of monitoring congestion in county towns. Setting up a system to
monitor roads, especially unclassified roads, would be an enormous resource
intensive task. RESOLVED: That the Annual
Report be noted. |
|
Highway Capital Programme 2020/2021 Update. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee
considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport regarding the
Highway Capital Programme 2020/2021. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item
9’ is filed with these minutes. Arising from the
discussion the following points were noted:- i.
There had been a pause in the delivery
of the capital maintenance programme at the start of lockdown. Working methods
had since been reviewed and all programmes had continued with the exception of
surface dressing. Surface dressing
funding was reallocated to alternative restorative treatments such as
patching. It was recognised that members of the public were using footpaths
more as a result of Covid-19 and it was important that the Council looked at
what it could to mitigate footpath deterioration. iii.
In response to concerns raised that
major highway schemes seemingly did nothing to ease traffic for local residents
the Director assured Members that improvements made to the road network, such
as the A512, were to enable development of new business and houses, if the
works had not been undertaken the impact on the existing network would have
been severe. iv.
In response to a query regarding the
possible redevelopment of Junction 20 the Director informed the Committee that
any improvements would only be made linked to the Lutterworth East development
as the County Council had not identified any issues with local access. The Council
were also aware that Highways England had no improvement plans at Junction 20
as they had higher priorities such as Junction 21. RESOLVED: That the Highway
Capital Programme 2020/2021 update be noted. |
|
Community Speed Enforcement Initiative. Minutes: The Committee
considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport regarding the
Community Speed Enforcement Initiative. A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda
Item 10’ is filed with these minutes. The Director
reported that Cabinet had adopted a formal position, on 20 October 2020, on the
establishment of a Community Speed Enforcement Initiative following the
successful trail of the seven average speed cameras in Leicestershire. Arising from the
discussion the following points were noted:- i.
Only the Police could enforce speed
limits, the County Council’s role was in supplementing the police with
equipment to allow them to undertake their enforcement role. Areas chosen were
classified as ‘community concern sites’. These sites
required that at least 50% of all traffic recorded as travelling at 10% plus
2mph above the speed limit. ii.
The County Council could only fund seven
sites at any one time. Officers recognised that Members received many requests,
like the ones submitted by Mrs Richards CC to Cabinet. The Director assured the
Committee that the Department was developing robust communications about how
sites would be selected and the process that would be undertaken., This would
be issued to members and include details of areas already listed. It was hoped
by Spring 2021 the data collection would be completed and the list of the next the seven sites
identified. iii.
The data would be gathered using radar
units and the data already held by the County Council and the Police to see
which areas had the worst problems. Members thanked the Director for the
openness and were pleased that the process would be transparent. It was hoped
such information would help especially in communities that had a perception of
speeding which the evidence might not support. iv.
In response to a query the Director
informed the Committee that the use of camera enforcement was the last choice
in the initiative. Prior to the enforcement other measures such as gateway
treatments, community speed watch, vehicle activated signs and mobile vehicle
activate signs would be considered before installation of speed cameras which
were resource intensive and needed to be set up in very exacting ways. v.
Existing sites would remain in the
programme for the next year and the Council would continue to review all sites
on a two-year basis and look to move sites where needed. vi.
In response to comments made the
Director informed Members that all road users should keep within the speed
limit; it was a limit and not a target to aim for. Members thanked
officers for the document and welcomed further information from the Department
regarding next steps. RESOLVED: That Members
supported the Community Speed Enforcement Initiative and welcomed further
information that could be shared with their communities. |
|
Network Management Plan Refresh. There will be a presentation for this item. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee
received a presentation from the Director of Environment and Transport
regarding the Network Management Plan Refresh. A copy of the report and
presentation is marked ‘Agenda Item 11’ and filed with these minutes. Arising from the
discussion the following points were noted:- i.
The Department were considering a
lane rental scheme, which would mean utility companies who wished to undertake
roadworks had to book and pay for the road lane. This could generate income
that could be invested back into the highways network and make utilities plan
their maintenance and reduce the time taken. Further details of the scheme
would be brought to Members for consideration. ii.
Where Members saw temporary traffic
lights where no works were ongoing, or poor patch work then it should be
reported to the County Council as quickly as possible. The Council’s permit and
fine system allowed them to have more inspectors on the network, however they could not be everywhere, the more information
the Council received the quicker it could react, including stepping in to make
utilities re-do any poor patch works. iii.
The Council were aware that traffic
was one of biggest contributors to air quality within Leicestershire.
Environment and Transport colleagues were working with the districts and Public
Health to look at joint working and consider what measures could be planned for
to mitigate air quality in the future. iv.
Operating a transport network with
Heavy Goods Vehicle’s posed an endless challenge of enforcing weight
restriction, which only the Police could do. The Council had seen previous
success from community lorry watch schemes. Unfortunately
the Council was constrained by the network and had to determine on appropriate
diversions Where possible these would be kept to main roads however it was
acknowledged that was not always possible. RESOLVED: a)
That the presentation received be
noted b) That
the draft network management plan documents be circulated to Members and that
any comments are submitted to Cabinet. |
|
Date of next meeting. The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled to take place on 14 January 2021 at 2pm. Minutes: It was noted that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on 14 January 2021 at 2pm. |