Please ask for: Fiona Harbord Telephone: 01482 613154 Fax: 01482 614804 Email: [email protected] Text phone: 01482 300349 Date: Wednesday, 04 January 2017

Dear Councillor,

Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission

The next meeting of the Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission will be held at 10:00 on Wednesday, 11 January 2017 in Room 77 .

The Agenda for the meeting is attached and reports are enclosed where relevant.

Please Note: It is likely that the public, (including the Press) will be excluded from the meeting during discussions of exempt items since they involve the possible disclosure of exempt information as describe in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Yours faithfully,

Scrutiny Officer for the Town Clerk

Town Clerk Services, City Council, The Guildhall, Alfred Gelder Street, Hull, HU1 2AA www.hullcc.gov.uk Page 1 of 26 Tel: 01482 300300

Energy and Infrastructure OSC

To: Membership: Councillors Allen, Craker, Dad, Fareham, Gardiner, Herrera-Richmond, Hewitt, Langley, Petrini (C), Quinn (DC) and Thompson D

Portfolio Holders: Councillor Mancey, Portfolio Holder for Energy City Councillor A Clark, Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods and Communities

Officers: Trish Dalby, Deputy Chief Executive Mark Jones, Director of Regeneration Andy Burton, City Streetscene Manager Malcolm Relph, City Economy Manager Graham Hall, Assistant City Manager Fiona Harbord, Scrutiny Officer (x6)

For Information: Councillor Sumpton, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee Councillor J Korczak Fields, Deputy Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee Reference Library (Public Set)

Page 2 of 26

Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission

10:00 on Wednesday, 11 January 2017

Room 77

A G E N D A PROCEDURAL ITEMS

1 Apologies To receive apologies for those Members who are unable to attend the meeting.

2 Declarations of Interest To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any Personal and Discloseable Pecuniary interest in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct.

(Members Code of Conduct - Part D1 of the Constitution)

3 Minutes of the Meeting held 14 December 2016 5 - 14 To approve the minutes as a true and correct record.

NON-EXEMPT ITEMS

4 Green Deal, ECO and Energy Efficiency Partner Procurement 15 - 20 Update To update on the streets in the city where houses have benefitted under the Energy Efficiency programme, including the cost of those improvements on a street and house unit basis.

5 City Streetscene Manager Presentation 21 - 22 To update the Commission on the cleansing of the Public Realm and the Public Realm impacts on traffic management, road closures and diversions.

Page 3 of 26

6 Bus Themed Discussion 23 - 24 To discuss, with representatives from the two major local bus companies, bus services and issues affecting them.

7 Energy and Infrastructure OSC Action List 2016/17 25 - 26 To ensure that the Commission’s actions are resolved in a timely manner.

EXEMPT ITEMS

Page 4 of 26

Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission

10:00 a.m. – 11.35 a.m. Wednesday 14 th December 2016, Room 77, The Guildhall, Alfred Gelder Street, Hull, HU1 2AA

Present:

Councillors P. Allen, D. Craker, J. Dad, J. Fareham, A. Gardiner, D. Hatcher (substituting for C. Quinn), H. Herrera-Richmond, J. Hewitt, L. Petrini (Chair), and D. Thompson.

In attendance: M. Relph (Assistant City Manager - City Economy) Minute 38 R. Glossop (Flood Risk Planning Manager) Minute 39 &40 A. Barron (Environment Agency) Minute 39 P. Stockhill (Environment Agency) Minute 39 F. Harbord (Scrutiny Officer) Minute 41 Apologies:

Cllr C. Quinn, who was substituted by Cllr D. Hatcher, and Cllr R. Langley,

Minute Number Action to be Taken by

Page 5 of 26

36 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Ray Teal

Cllr J. Hewitt and Cllr D. Thompson declared a personal interest in agenda items 6 & 7 insofar as they sit on the Board of Directors of KWL.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

N/A N/A

37 MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD 16 NOVEMBER 2016 a) N/A

The Scrutiny Officer submitted the draft minutes from the meeting held on Wednesday, 16 November, 2016.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

a) That, the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday, 16 a) N/A November 2016, having been printed and circulated, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the Chair.

NON EXEMPT ITEMS

38 a) N/A DIRECTOR OF REGENERATION PRESENTATION b) Fiona Harbord/ Di Taylor/ Malcolm Relph c) Alex Codd d) Malcolm Relph e) Fiona Harbord Malcolm Relph, Assistant City Manager - City Economy, attended the Commission to deliver a presentation which covered the

Page 6 of 26 P a g e 2

Energy Park, Energy Works – Spencer Group, and Greenport.

The Commission was informed that: i. The projects were an illustration of the importance of green energy to the regeneration and economy of the regions ii. Not all of the projects were Council owned or led. iii. That the Greenport project had involved a lot of time spent on jobs and apprenticeships and ensuring that there was an appropriate skills base to support the project.

The Commission discussed: i. In light of the Spencer Group development being almost complete, when the Yorkshire Energy Park would be completed; that the Park was still subject to planning approval from East Riding Council; that the project had been on-going for years and was within the City Plan in its first form, and whether delivery would quicken up; that the project had been through three different designs; and, that was doing all it could to support it. ii. What plan B was for if the planning application was turned down, and whether HCC could appeal the decision; and, that the full planning procedure would be followed if it were needed. iii. Whether, as the only transport option for travel to and from the Yorkshire Energy Park seemed to be via the A63, consideration had been given to any other travel options; that a travel plan had been drawn up; whether there were options within it, such as trams, that there was a school or college to be based on the site, so options other than cars needed to be included; and, that rail lines to Withernsea still existed. iv. Whether any organisations had signed up to locate there; and, that there were companies committed to the Park. v. How many local jobs were to be created at the Park, that it was difficult to quantify, but it was around the 750 to 1,000 mark; that around 60 jobs had been created by the Spencer Group; and, that the Spencer Group collected waste from further afield than hull, with around 200k tonnes collected from outside the City.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

a) That the Director of Regeneration’s Presentation is noted. a) N/A

Page 7 of 26 P a g e 3

b) That a visit to the Greenport Library facility be organised b) As per the action for members of the Commission to enable them to see how the Greenport programme works in practice and how people are trained and supported to get where they need to be to be employed under the programme. c) So that, should the application be turned down, the decision is c) That it be recommended that, should it be necessary, the appealed. full Planning process be followed with regard to the Yorkshire Energy Park application. d) To ensure that the members of the relevant Commission are d) That the Assistant City Manager - City Economy will provided with the facts about the planned travel to and from the provide, for off-agenda circulation to the Commission, the Energy Park. travel plan relating to the Yorkshire Energy Park. e) Concerns were raised that the Energy Park would house many e) That the transport options for the site be discussed within businesses with many employees, and that the travel arrangements a meeting of the Commission at the earliest opportunity. for those people would only be intended to be by road. The Commission wished to discuss the travel plan for the Park and alternative forms of transport.

a) N/A 39 UPDATE ON FLOOD DEFENCE SCHEMES IN KINGSTON b) Rachel Glossop

UPON HULL

Rachel Glossop, Flood Risk Planning Manager, and Andrew Barron and Paul Stockhill, of the Environment Agency, attended the Commission to update on the flood defences schemes ongoing within by all Risk Management Authorities.

The Commission received a presentation from the Environment Agency on the Holderness Drain Flood Alleviation Scheme. The Commission was provided with details of the Castle Hill Farm project, which would alleviate the flooding of Holderness Drain. The Council had been awarded £2.14m of LEP funding, which a project team consisting of Hull City Council, the Council and the Environment Agency would use, once various options for delivery had been considered. These included doing nothing, in which case the area would continue to

Page 8 of 26 P a g e 4

flood, banking properties, but the banks would need to be many metres high and the water would still have to go somewhere.

The Commission discussed: i. The life expectancy of the 1949 pumping station, and whether it would support the planned flood defence scheme; that the costing of the scheme included improvements to the pumping station to ensure a 100 year lifespan; whether the 26m capacity of the pumping station was now or following improvements; that theoretically that was the current capacity, but in practice it never reached that capacity; the cost of a new pumping station; and, that this would involve capital costs as well as maintenance costs. ii. That Hull being flat needed pumping; that estimates showed that the tide was going to rise by one metre over the next 100 years, whether the Environment Agency were sure that pumping would work if the tide rose that much; whether such levels had been planned for; and, which agencies would contribute funding should there be additional costs to cope with the increases. iii. That planning included climate change and other issues; that plans could only be made for the next investment periods so plans could not be made for the next 500 years; concerns that the planners did not have the knowledge needed, bearing in mind that the flood at had occurred because the pumps were not submersible; that the Environment Agency had delivered successful schemes across the country and were well experienced; and, that £16m could have been saved had the pumps been properly planned. iv. That the Commission was more interested in Hull flood prevention rather than the East Riding; and, that water facilities were owned by various agencies in both the East Riding and Hull, which was why there was an integrated flood strategy. v. That there was an opportunity at the Castle Hill Farm development for community use; that the more benefits, such as health and community use, then the greater the opportunity for funding; that a holistic approach was being used and there was room for programme slide within the timescales; and, that a technical group existed where comments from Hull City Council were fed via the Portfolio Holder. vi. That the protection of 1,750 homes by the scheme did not seem many; that, although the saving of homes was a priority, there would be other benefits from the scheme. vii. Concerns that more pressure was needed from the Chief Executive and health bosses, and other appropriate big hitters to put pressure on for the progress of the scheme, and that MPs should also be involved. viii. That the current tenant of the farm could not farm the land due to it being too wet, and whether there would be business benefits in drainage of the land; that the current tenant was looking at alternative farming; and, that a cost benefit analysis would look at flooding; which of the two options of planning for a 2.2m or a 4.4m capacity would be best; that there was no answer as capacity was not being looked at; and, that an embankment had been looked at but there was un-surety as to how much would have to be stored. ix. What mitigations on risk had been considered for if the project was not finished in time for 2020, and for creep; that there was confidence that the project would meet 2020, and that some leeway had been written in to accommodate delays.

Rachel Glossop then presented a summary of the other flood defence schemes, as detailed in her briefing within the meeting’s document pack.

Page 9 of 26 P a g e 5

The Commission discussed: i. The split of the purchase option between Hull CC and ERYC; and, that the £2m would be split between Hull at 45% and the East Riding at 55%; that neither council was [paying for the land. ii. The progress of the Norland Avenue schemes; whether it was ready to go the Areas for consultation; that Norland was different and difficult as it was based on individual SuDS on residents’ properties; that the Sydney Smith scheme was progressing but work was still on-going to get water from Kirkella; whether there was any movement on the Ganstead scheme; that Ganstead was part of the Bransholme scheme, but it had been pushed back by a few years totey to link it with the YW Water Culture project; whether it could be moved forward; and, that Yorkshire Water set the funding period, so movement was reliant on them. iii. That drains and gullies appeared to be blocked again; and, that, as suggested in the Yorkshire Water Water Culture project, communities needed to look to see what they could do for themselves, including the unblocking of drains and gullies by the removal of leaves etc. iv. That the funding for the schemes was to be welcomed; whether there were any plans to extend walkways along the River; and that the + scheme was intended to open up and invigorate and regenerate the River area.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

a) That the briefing is noted. a) N/A

b) That it be recommended that the Commission receives from b) As per the action Cabinet the agreed multi-agency strategy for getting added value, to ensure it is effective, timely and considers all options.

a) N/A 40 PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF DOCK OFFICER b) Rachel Glossop/ Cllr A Clark c) Rachel Glossop/ Fiona Harbord/ Di Taylor ROW/HIGH STREET FLOOD DEFENCE SCHEME REPORT

Rachel Glossop, Flood Risk Planning Manager, attended the Commission to present a report seeking approval from the Leader to enter into an agreement to receive ERDF grant funding and commit the same to a Flood Defence Scheme commissioned by the Environment Agency.

Page 10 of 26 P a g e 6

The Commission discussed: i. Whether agencies were doing all they could to preserve the Arctic Corsair; that Dunston Shipyards had long-running expertise and were being used to assess the plans and carry out any move that was agreed; that the ship would only be moving a short distance; the total funding needed was £6.39m; that other sources of funding were being looked at, such as funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund; and, that the cost of opening the gate on No,2 dock that had been closed for a long time was included in the funding bid. ii. That many agencies seemed to be involved in negotiations; who the lead of the project was, as it was important to have an identifiable lead; that the Environment Agency was leading on the River Hull Defences, and the Council saw an opportunity to join up with that work; the Environment Agency could not bid for the funding that the Council was bidding for; and, that the bid, if approved, would include funding for a project manager who would be based in the Major Projects team. iii. That the Kingston upon Hull Act did not stipulate the quality of the defences; whether the Act could be changed to include that; and, that the legislation needed to be reviewed. iv. That it was intended that the scheme would bring other benefits and would eventually help to regenerate the area and make it a visitor attraction. v. Whether the next phase of flood defences at Albert Dock had commenced; that Albert Dock was next in the phase; and, that the agencies would like to bring other benefits to the area. vi. Whether the potential overflow of the tidal barrier would prompt a review and improvement of its capacity; that the barrier would be considered, but it was schemes that had other benefits that would be included in this bid; that previously discussions had taken place about making the barrier user friendly; that when the barrier was built it was supposed to last 30 years, in which case it was due for renewal; that its lifetime had been extended because it had been refurbished; and, no thought had been given to future tidal rises. vii. Whether anyone had modelled the difference between the past, when there were barges in the River Hull and no silt, and present times; that studies and modelling had been carried out with regard to dredging, including the cost of dredging and moving the silt to landfill; that there was funding available for silt testing; and, that testing results were initially showing that small changes to farming land practices may prevent silting; concerns about the charging for landfill when the dredging would be a benefit; why the silt could not instead be dropped in the ; and, that there would be the risk of contaminating the Humber with pollutants.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

a) That the recommendations, as detailed at section 2 of the a) N/A officer report, are supported.

b) That the appropriate ministerial department be asked to b) The Commission considered it pointless that the local authority is

Page 11 of 26 P a g e 7

consider cutting the circle of charging local authorities for charged by a government department for dredging in order to the dredging of rivers in order to pay for the land-fill pay for the landfill charge to another government department. disposal of silt, and instead acknowledge that such works are for flood protection, and introduce a land-fill charge exemption.

c) That a tour of the various flood defence schemes be c) To enable Commission members to see the bigger picture of the organised for the members of this Commission and for flood prevention schemes and how they fit together. members of the Planning Committee.

41 ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE OSC DRAFT WORK a) Fiona Harbord PROGRAMME 2016/17 b) Fiona Harbord/ Di Taylor c) Fiona Harbord d) Andy Burton Fiona Harbord, Scrutiny Officer, presented the Commission’s draft work programme, to enable the Commission to consider and agree the latest version.

The Commission discussed: i. The visits that had been agreed at this meeting. ii. The need for the City to have a parking strategy, and for that to be included in this Commission’s work programme. iii. The rail themed meeting in February 2017. iv. The attendance of Andrew Percy MP at the January meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee.

Recommendations: Reasons for Recommendations:

a) That additional issues that will be discussed at the a) These were suggested topics in order to broaden the annual February Rail-themed meeting will include, progress of discussion. the Paragon Interchange improvements, non- development of the market, connections to Hedon and

Page 12 of 26 P a g e 8

possible plans for the responsibility for rail lines to fall to rail operators, and that invitations be extended to all relevant agencies. b) The Commission wished for the visits to the Greenport library and b) That the visits of the Commission agreed within this the flood defence schemes to be outside scheduled meeting times meeting will take place out of meeting time. so that day to day business did not have to be deferred. c) That Members be requested to submit questions in c) Mr Percy is to attend the OSMC meeting of 9 January 2017 and, as advance of the visit to OSMC by Andrew Percy. the Commission had previously requested that Mr Percy attend and E&I OSC meeting, it was agreed that the Commission's queries would be collated and submitted at the OSMC. d) That the City Streetscene Manger be requested to produce a report to the Commission with a view to d) Concerns were raised that the City needed a parking strategy but producing a City Parking Strategy, which considers the that no strategy was being planned. issues of what will be done in the City as a long term strategy.as car membership continues to increase and parking space decreases, and that Members be requested to contribute to the Strategy their own knowledge of problem areas for parking in their Wards.

Page 13 of 26 P a g e 9

Page 14 of 26

Briefing Paper to the Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Wards : ALL Scrutiny Commission

11 th January 2017

Green Deal, ECO and Energy Efficiency Partner Procurement Update

Briefing Paper of the Neighbourhoods & Housing City Manager on behalf of the Deputy Chief Executive

1. Purpose of the Paper and Summary

1.1 The purpose of this briefing paper is to update Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission of the streets in the city where houses have benefitted under the Energy Efficiency programme, including the cost of those improvements on a street and house unit basis. The paper updates the Commission on the previous report dated 11th November 2015.

2. Background

2.1 The Council has progressed the appointment of a citywide Green Deal /Energy Company Obligation (ECO) partner to deliver energy efficiency measures across all housing tenures including the installation of external solid wall insulation to non-traditional council owned housing stock and structurally repair approximately 340 ‘Winget’ constructed properties in the Preston Road area. In January 2016 Willmott Dixon Energy Services (WDES) was appointed as the Council’s Green Deal / ECO partner. From January WDES are being re- branded as ‘Fortem’.

2.2 Following the Summer budget announcements in July 2015 and resultant 1% rent reduction in each of the next four years for all social tenancies, a clause was placed in the Green Deal / ECO Contract, allowing the contract to be decoupled each financial year.

2.3 Works began on Phase 1 in March 2016 to deliver external wall insulation to 401council owned properties – ‘wimpey no fines’ in the Thorpes area. Works to these properties were completed in December 2016.

Author: Ross Ferguson Page 15 of 26 Status: Draft Date: 03/01/2017 Page 1 of 3 2.4 Following a period of design and pilot works, contractors commenced works to the Preston Road properties in August 2016. Works have commenced in Bilton Grove. There are a total of 340 properties in the Preston Road area for refurbishment, 289 being ‘Winget’ properties (which are registered as being defective), which will be structurally repaired and insulated. These works will provide Non Traditional Housing Accreditation for the properties.

2.5 There are a total of 49 privately owned properties through right to buy within the Preston Road area and funding of the structural improvement works and external wall insulation has been agreed (funded through New Homes Bonus - government funding for building new homes) and grant funding via Hull Warm Zone. The decision to refurbish the privately owned properties on Preston Road was primarily due to the fact that the Non Traditional Housing Accreditation scheme warranty could only be provided if all adjacent properties are structurally repaired. Many of the properties are adjacent to council owned stock and the structural works benefit the council’s properties and regeneration of the area. This area is benefiting from major development with the council, through its development partner Keep moat, building new homes on the cleared site opposite Bilton Grove.

2.6 The Council will continue to work in partnership will Hull Warm zone to deliver a range of energy efficiency measures across the city. Although funding for energy efficiency measures is very challenging the Council has continued to deliver energy efficiency works utilising ECO (Energy Company Obligation) (via Npower) to help fund these measures. Additionally, the Council has been successful in securing a proportion of Customer Redress Funding to help fund energy efficiency works primarily in the private sector.

2.7 Willmott Dixon Energy Services Limited were instructed in December 2016 to deliver external solid wall insulation and frontage boundary improvements for the Granville and Walliker Street scheme following a robust negotiation period to demonstrate value for money. A comprehensive negotiation process has been undertaken with officers from Hull City Council and the Council’s Technical Advisors, NPS Humber LTD, who were collectively satisfied that the combined costings and quality offered best value.

3. Issues for Consideration

3.1 That Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission note the costs of works as contained with appendix 1.

3.2 The identified properties in Preston Road and Orchard Park are poorly insulated and the installation of external wall Insulation will dramatically improve the properties’ thermal efficiency. The properties are located in areas of deprivation and the installation of insulation will reduce residents’ heating bills and help to tackle fuel poverty. The structural works will provide accreditation of the previously designated defective properties. Finally, there is new build housing in neighbouring areas of both Preston Road and Orchard Park and the insulation works will ensure a holistic approach to improvements across the areas.

3.3 The current ECO offer is until 31 March 2017 and the council will work with Npower and other energy companies to secure another offer following this period.

3.4 Along with customer redress funding the Council is actively looking for funding opportunities to increase the maximum number of Right to Buy properties included within the programme of works.

Author: Ross Ferguson Page 16 of 26 Status: Draft Date: 03/01/2017 Page 2 of 3

4. Next steps

4.1 The Council is working with Willmott Dixon/Fortem to agree costs / activities for year 2 of the programme 2017/2018.

4.2 It is anticipated that progress will continue to be reported through the various Committees.

Neighbourhoods & Housing City Manager on behalf of the Deputy Chief Executive

Contact Officer: Ross Ferguson Telephone No. : 615486

Officer Interests: None

Appendix 1 – External Solid Wall Insulation Costs

Author: Ross Ferguson Page 17 of 26 Status: Draft Date: 03/01/2017 Page 3 of 3

Page 18 of 26 Budget Cost Comparison Scheme

Orchard Park Estate Phase 1 (Thorpes) Preston Road

Number of Contract Average contract props in costs per Num costs per property contract Total Cost property props Total Cost

Total per unit (excluding structural works on Preston Road) £ 8,938.21 401£ 3,584,222.21 £ 12,614.55 340£ 4,289.95

Page 19 of 26 Budget Cost Comparison Scheme

Granville and Walliker Street Number Average of props contract costs in per property contract Total Cost Total per unit excluding roofing £ 15,343.56 136 £ 2,202,390.00 Boundary Walls and Railings included above

All costs excludes NPS management fees Granville and Walliker Street and associated court terrace streets

Page 20 of 26

Briefing Paper to the Environment & Infrastructure Overview Wards : & Scrutiny Commission

11 January 2017

City Streetscene Manager Presentation

Briefing Paper of the City Streetscene Manager

1. Purpose of the Paper and Summary

A verbal update will be provided on the following items:

• Public realm impacts on traffic management, road closures and diversions. • Update on the cleansing of the public realm.

The reason for verbal update is that a lot will be happening from the time between required upload and actual date of the Commission.

One of the major Streetscene aspects overseen by the Commission is also a main topic on the agenda for the January meeting.

Andy Burton City Streetscene Manager

Contact Officer : Andy Burton Telephone No. : (61)2742

Officer Interests: None

Background Documents: -

None

Author: Page 21 of 26 Status: Date: 03/01/2017 Page 1 of 1

Page 22 of 26

Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission 11 January 2017

Peter Shipp (Group Chairman and Chief Executive, East Yorkshire Motor Services), Michelle Hargreaves (Managing Director, Stagecoach East Midlands) and Dave Skepper (Commercial Director, Stagecoach East Midlands (includes Hull)) will be in attendance.

Possible topics for discussion with the East Yorkshire Motor Services and Stagecoach representatives and Hull City Council officers:

1. EYMS and Stagecoach update on new developments

2. Bus lane enforcement – LA and bus company perspective

3. Impact of public realm works (and, going forward, post public realm)

4. Planning for City of Culture 2017

5. Progress with real time bus updates

6. Road surfaces on bus routes

7. The impact of reduced Council supported bus services

8. The Council's overview of spending plans for 2017/18

9. Park and Ride update (including any progress of new P&Rs)

10. Traffic congestion, including relationship with Highways and Council traffic management (relates to point 11 below)

11. Discussion of progress on the issues raised at the meeting of 5 October 2016 that Professor David Begg attended:

That the Council, along with its public transport partners, will consider working towards long-term planning to meet the challenge of reducing the use of cars and making bus travel more appealing, to include: i. the consideration of the limiting of vehicles in the city centre ii. changes to the charging structure for parking in Council owned and private car parks iii. how the planning department can be worked with so that the correlation between out of town shopping and business parks and the increase in

Page 23 of 26 car journeys and decrease of bus travel is considered under planning applications iv. the establishment of city car clubs v. introducing work place parking levies vi. the increasing of cross-city bus services and non-city centre bus hubs vii. how van delivery patterns can be changed viii. the writing of schools traffic plans to encourage car sharing and increased walking to schools ix. how the attitudes of affluent travellers towards bus travel can be changed x. how to increase engagement with those who are not already bus passengers.

Fiona Harbord Scrutiny Officer

Page 24 of 26 ABCDFG H IJKL 1 OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY ACTION LIST 2016-2017 2 Energy and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Commission 3

CHAIR: Cllr SCRUTINY LEAD OFFICER: Andy Petrini OFFICER: Fiona Burton / Mark Jones Harbord 4 5

Responsible Commission Requested Reason for submission and actions Action/Decision Agenda Items Officer (In Format Key Lines of Enquiry/Other comments Outcome/Update Info DUE DATE RAG Date By/When resulting Allocation attendance) 6

Portfolio Holder Councillor Standing Item To update the Commission on the 14/09/2016 Presentation Priorities - Energy City Mancey (Annual) Portfolio Holder's Priorities for 2016/17

10 Action List Circulated 19.09.16. That the Commission be kept informed on Cllr Mancey had advised that various methods Email sent 01.12.16 Andy Burton/ Adam developments around tackling the problem of clearing chewing gum and preventing it from TBC A McArthur of chewing gum on the City’s pathways. littering pathways were being considered. 13

Action List Circulated 19.09.16. Meeting of 03.10.16 - The That a recommendation be made to Deputy Chief Executive will Cabinet that each primary school in the draft a reply which explains It was felt that it was better that all schools were City is targeted by Civil Enforcement that the service is exploring the covered for a single week rather than ad hoc Oct-16 A Laura Scholes Officers for one full week on a recurring potential use of cameras and enforcement. basis, with a list of the schools being that the level of penalties is set worked through on rotation. and cannot be amended." emailed AB, DS, and AU for response 01.12.16 16

That the Commission will receive to its To enable the Commission to monitor the September 2016 meeting an update and first year's performance following the assessment of the first year following introduction of the Bus Lane APNRs. APNR Bus Lane installation. Update on the First Andy Burton Requested TO INCLUDE:- That, should the The restrictions on Brook Street were 05/10/2016 Year of Operation of Briefing Paper (Andy Umpleby) Item (09.03.16) information become available, the introduced during the week when the Bus Lane APNR Commission will be provided with meeting took place and the Commission details of whether the restrictions at wished to see evidence of the restriction's Brook Street have improved traffic flow success in addressing the issues it was and the punctuality of buses. intended to address.

26

Currently there is a profiled surplus, although That at an appropriate time officers will this may be an overestimate as penalties may report back to the Commission on Action List Circulated 05.10.16. Andy Burton/ Doug reduce as more residents recognise bus lanes. TBC A decisions around how any surplus bus Email sent 01.12.16. Sharp The surplus can be spent on anything that lane enforcement funding is to be spent. supports bus travel. 28 That at an appropriate time officers will Action List Circulated 05.10.16. report back to the Commission on the It was acknowledged that the use of cars within Email sent 01.12.16. Ties in outcomes of discussions around TBC A Andy Burton the city centre needed to be deterred. with the request formt he reductions in the car parking offer and an December Meeting for a increase in car parking charges. 29

Page 25 of 26 ABCDFG H IJKL

Outstanding Action Ian Anderson Standing Item To review the outstanding actions of To ensure that actions are followed up in a 16/11/2016 Action List List (Fiona Harbord) (Monthly) the Commission. timely manner.

31

That the City Streetscene Manager be The Commission discussed schools parking requested to provide the Commission with and referred the subject to Cabinet, but the Action List Circulated 28.11.16, an update on the action from the Assistant Chief Executive was asked to give a Email sent to AB, DS and AU Dec-16 A Andy Burton Commission’s September meeting response to the Commssion. She referred this 01.12.16 regarding the enforcement of parking in to the City Streetscene Manager but a response the vicinity of schools. has not been provided. 32

Page 26 of 26