Agenda and minutes

To receive comments or views from members of the public at the Panel’s discretion.

Mrs. Mary Patrick of Stamford addressed the DSP about problems with the adaptation of tenants’ properties. Tenants had been waiting two years for the adaptation of their bathroom and she was concerned that the Council were not fulfilling their commitments. The Scrutiny Officer advised that as an issue that covered the remit of two DSPs, liaison with the Chairman of the Community DSP would be necessary. Mrs. Patrick had also submitted a question on this topic to the Council meeting on Thursday 7^th September 2006.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.                  To advise the Chairman of the Community DSP of the time delay for the adaptation of tenants’ properties;

2.                  That should the response arising from the meeting of the full Council on 7^th September 2006 be unsatisfactory, the relevant DSP should further investigate the problem.

The Panel will discuss their site visit to Gorse Lane, Grantham and the impact that heavy traffic has had.

Before the meeting, members of the DSP went on a site visit to Gorse Lane, Grantham at the request of local residents. Concern over the condition of the roads had been raised at the Grantham Local Area Assembly on 7^th June 2006. The issue had also been championed by the Grantham Road Users’ Group.

At the meeting two residents of Gorse Lane explained the problems they had been experiencing; heavy goods vehicles had been using the road as an alternative route to travel between the A1 near Spittlegate Level, the A1 entry near Wyville Road and the A607. The vehicles had damaged the edges of the road and because there was no footpath, the road was dangerous for pedestrians. Residents wanted to see a weight restriction of 7.5 tonnes. A lot of vehicles parked on the verges while visiting a local business.

Residents reported that Leicestershire County Council were prepared impose weight restrictions on any B road in the county but could not apply this to the part of Gorse Lane because it crossed the County border. The Lincolnshire County Council member for the area stated he would look into the County Council policy for imposing weight restrictions. If a weight restriction were to be imposed, waivers would have to apply for access to the local business. The intention of any weight restriction would be to force large vehicles to use more suitable roads.

Residents stated that the problem had become worse since satellite navigation systems increased in popularity; the systems advised drivers to use Gorse Lane.

To increase safety for pedestrians, Panel members suggested that the County Council should look into widening the road. This would mean vehicles would be able to pass more safely. Some members were worried that increasing the width of the road would increase the number of vehicles that parked along the verges which would only be minimally successful with yellow lines because of limited enforcement resources.

Despite the involvement of the Grantham Road Users’ Group and the lead taken by the Gorse Lane Residents’ Group, there had been no involvement on a local level. One member suggested that to increase local support, Gorse Lane residents should contact their local Parish Council.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Panel recommend that:

1.                  Lincolnshire County Council cost up a capital scheme to widen Gorse Lane, Grantham;

2.                  A weight restriction of 7.5 tonnes should be applied to Gorse Lane, Grantham;

3.                  Harlaxton Parish Council should become involved to increase the local support base;

4.                  The Department of Transport should be contacted to find out the criteria for including and excluding roads within satellite navigation systems;

5.                  The Healthy Environment Portfolio Holder should be kept informed.

The Panel to be notified of any substitute members.

The Panel were notified that Councillor Exton would be substituting for Councillor Fisher for this meeting only.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Pease.

Members are asked to declare interests in items for consideration at the meeting.

No declarations of interest were made.

The notes of the meeting held on 12^th July 2006 are attached for information.

                        (Enclosure)

Noted.

An interim report by the Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, detailing long-term plans for the Stamford Hospital site would be presented at the next meeting of the Panel on Tuesday 7^th November 2006.

The Panel will receive an update on steps that are being taken to increase the Council’s energy efficiency.

At the meeting of the Panel held on 6^th June 2006, members of the Panel requested an update on the measures the Council were taking to achieve energy efficiency savings.

In June it had been suggested that the Council should look at alternative means of producing energy for their buildings; the Panel put particular emphasis on the sport and leisure facilities within Grantham.

Wind Power

Three sizes of wind turbines were available: 1.5KWH, 10 & 20KWH and 50KWH. If the 1.5KWH turbines were used, multiple units would be required to provide sufficient energy which would be unsightly and provide little gain at a large cost to the council. The site was not compatible with the 10 & 20 KWH turbines because of the proximity of houses; there would also be a cost to the authority with this option. 50KWH turbines owned in partnership would mean little or no cost for the council; however, like the 10 & 20 KWH turbines, they were not suitable for the site.

Solar Panels

Work had been undertaken to examine different types of solar panel. Some panels produced general electric energy while solar thermal panels could be used solely for heating water.

Carbon Output

The 100 day review of energy consumption was due to end on 12^th September 2006. A survey had been carried out stating where savings could be achieved. Posters had been put up in various departments of the Council and energy presentations were being rolled out to staff.

Panel members were interested in providing energy using an under-floor heating system. A trench would be dug around the building, into which pipework would be laid. Liquid would travel through the pipe network following the same principles as a boiler.

There was much enthusiastic support for the idea of creating energy efficient homes. It was suggested that pilot schemes could be run where new developments of starter homes were being built.

The Panel briefly talked about the opportunities for energy efficiency within the Council’s car pool and the withdrawal of the bicycle pool.

Discussion ensued on whether there should be Council targets for the amount of energy saved. It was felt that energy efficiencies would be difficult to monitor because energy use depended upon many variables.

CONCLUSION:

The DSP recommend to the Healthy Environment and Economic Portfolio Holders that new developments that include starter homes, should be prototypes for energy efficient housing.

The Panel will receive a presentation on the incentivisation of recycling.

To coincide with the roll out of the Council’s new twin bin scheme, the Sustainable Waste Management Policy Officer was invited to talk about the incentivisation of recycling.

The circulation of wheeled bins would begin on Wednesday 6^th September 2006. Each bin would be fitted with a chip; the only information the chip would hold was the address to which the bin belonged and the time and date that the bin was emptied. The equipment used to scan the chip would weigh the bin. All weights would be on a percentage basis of total waste produced. Incentives could be awarded on an individual, street, village or town basis.

Panel members agreed that using incentives to get people to recycle would be more successful than penalising those who do not. The twin bin system would have been in operation for a year before any incentive scheme would be considered.

Some members were concerned that people would try to remove the chips; they would be difficult to remove because they were moulded into the plastic during manufacture. The bin would not be emptied if the chip was missing.

The assisted collection service would continue after the introduction of wheeled bins, however new criteria for assessment would be developed.

Households which were not eligible for wheeled bins would be issued with pink sacks for refuse and clear sacks for recycling. Properties would be exempt if there was no front garden and no access to a back garden from the road.

Panel members congratulated the Waste and Contract Service team for the speed with which they had been able to initiate the twin bin.

CONCLUSION:

The Panel supported the introduction of incentives after the scheme has been in operation for a minimum of six months but did not support the introduction of sanctions for people who did not recycle.

                        (Enclosure)

Noted. Updated BVPI information was circulated at the meeting.

The average time taken to remove flytips had increased to 3 days; a number of reports appeared at first to have no traces of asbestos. When a team was deployed within one day of the report, they discovered asbestos and had to request specialists before disposal could take place.

Other indicators had been affected by hot weather; the percentage of household waste recycled had dropped because of the lack of green waste. The street cleaning pass rate for town centres had also fallen as members of the public had been using communal areas and leaving litter. This had led to an increase in the number of fixed penalty notices that were issued.

The Deepings Leisure Centre Working Group will update the Panel.

The Vice-Chairman reported that the Deepings Leisure Centre Working Group had held their second meeting on 28^th July 2006, at which there was representation from Market Deeping Town Council, Deeping St. James Parish Council and the Leisure Centre Manager. The working group were informed of the progress that had been made since the first meeting. Improvements had been made to the viewing gallery, ceiling tiles, coat hooks and the Welland room. Improvements to the Welland Room had been a joint project between the school and Leisure Connection.

A request had been made for costing information for the replacement of floor and wall tiles in the wet changing room, the replacement of the cold water storage unit and the complete internal redecoration of the leisure centre. It was hoped that recommendations for improvements could be included in the budget process for 2007/08.

The next meeting of the working group was scheduled for 22^nd September 2006.

CONCLUSION:

Councillor Craft to provide an update from the Deepings Leisure Centre Working Group at the next meeting of the Healthy Environment DSP (7^th November 2006)

                        (Enclosure)

Noted.

CONCLUSION

1.                  To hold the next meeting of the Healthy Environment DSP on 7^th November 2006 at the Meres Leisure Centre;

2.                  The Panel should meet at the Leisure Centre at 1:45 for a tour.

The meeting was closed at 16:27.