Agenda item

Questions to the Cabinet Leader and Cabinet Members received under Standing Order 10(c)

Meeting of Council, Thursday, 10 October 2013 6.30 pm (Item 45.)

To deal with the following questions to the Cabinet Leader and / or other Cabinet Members, in accordance with Standing Order 11.3(a):

(i) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr D’Agorne:

“The Living Wage – how many other organisations in the City of York have now signed up to support this initiative by applying it to their own workforce?”

(ii) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Aspden:

“What are the daily results for the city-centre footfall cameras (Parliament Street and Coney Street) since the beginning of August and how do they compare to the same period last year?”

(iii) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet Leader name the areas in the city that have 'free' Wi-Fi funded by City of York Council, how much did this cost by hotspot in the last financial year and this financial year, what is the future roll out programme plan and forecast costs, and what attempts have been made to attract sponsorship?”

(iv) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“Has any contract been awarded to webcast council meetings and, if so, how and when was this decision was taken?”

(v) To the Deputy Leader (in relation to her Civic & Democratic Services portfolio)from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Deputy Leader list by name, date and destination the official foreign trips council members have been on so far this financial year and the foreign trips planned or in the pipeline for members in the remainder of the financial year, whilst, also outlining what procedures and reporting requirements are in place to authorise and monitor the value and outcomes from these trips?”

(vi) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Weed removal from streets is noticeably lacking this year – can you explain to residents of Danum Rd area why they have to wait until November for a Community Payback team to remove vegetation from paths and gutters?”

(vii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Richardson:

“Given that some residents have paid in advance the new Green Bin Tax, will Council reimburse this payment or carry the payments forward as a credit for year 14/15, given April 2014 is the start date for the Tax?”

(viii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Richardson:

“Residents are reporting damage or loss of refuse bins into refuse vehicles. Will council replace the bins free of charge and implement a mandatory form of reporting loss or damage of bins by a unique numbered incident report, providing date and time and will council also mark all replaced bins with a unique I.D number?”

(ix) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What work is being undertaken to look at ‘plan B’ alternative to the costly incinerator project that is no longer viable due to the withdrawal of the £65m of PFI loan?”

(x) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Reid:

“Why were new refuse collection arrangements introduced before the Council was in a position to guarantee that bins would be emptied as per the published schedule?”

(xi) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Firth:

“Since the new waste collection arrangements began on 9th September how many bins were not collected on the scheduled collection day?”

(xii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Firth:

“After the recent changes in the waste collections, what has been the additional costs incurred to date in returning to clear bins that were not emptied in accordance with the published timetable?”

(xiii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Reid:

“Will the Cabinet Member apologise publicly to the thousands of York residents who have been inconvenienced by the bungled launch of the revised waste collection service?”

(xiv)To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Is the Cabinet Member satisfied with the response rate to calls to the Smarter York helpline compared to two years ago?”

(xv) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Is the council working with the fire service to consider any implications for fire safety and emergency planning following the boat fire at Kings Staith last Saturday?”

(xvi) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“In early September the average waiting time for residents calling the Council 551551 number was over 2.5 minutes. Over 40% gave up waiting and abandoned their call. Would the Cabinet member agree that this is an unacceptable way to treat taxpayers who are trying to report issues to the Council?”

(xvii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“What steps is the Cabinet Member taking to ensure that the problems in the Council’s customer contact centre are addressed and would he say what his current targets are for Time to Answer and Abandoned calls on both switchboard lines?”

(xviii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Jeffries:

“Oliver House has remained empty for 18 months (other than for access by a ‘security by occupation’ company), but the Cabinet Member has not taken steps to maximise the income available from the property, for example by letting the parking spaces associated with it. When does the Cabinet Member anticipate the building being brought back into residential use or sold to generate a significant capital receipt?”

(xix) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Orrell:

“In answer to a Freedom of Information Request in March the Council said that the number of directly employed casual staff on zero hour contracts was 2962. Can the Cabinet Member confirm the latest figure and break the number down by role?”

(xx) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet Member list by name, date and destination the official foreign trips Council staff have been on so far this financial year and the foreign trips planned or in the pipeline for them in the remainder of the financial year, whilst, also outlining what procedures and reporting requirements are in place to authorise and monitor the value and outcomes from these trips?”

(xxi)To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“What, if any, legal advice did the Council take before blocking payday loan websites at libraries, Explore centres, West Offices and through the city-centre Wi-Fi provision?”

(xxii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Jeffries:

“How many members of staff and per department are trained in ‘Easy Read’?”

(xxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Leaving aside the significant contribution arising from the move to the new offices, what is the current performance of the council in achieving its carbon reduction targets and what are the targets for the next two years?”

(xxiv) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Will the revised local plan include an assessment of the traffic impact and implications of proposed housing developments at Winthorpe and Land North of Clifton Moor?”

(xxv) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What existing and additional air quality monitoring is taking place on the inner ring road to assess the impact of the Lendal Bridge closure and Coppergate enforcement measures?”

(xxvi) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Given the government funding for flood defence work in Fulford will the work now include raising Fordlands Rd to remove flooding here and will Persimmon still be required to make the same financial contribution specified in the original S106 agreement?”

(xxvii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Richardson:

“Can the Cabinet Member remove the many confusing signs across the City referring to the closure of Lendal Bridge and can he implement a city wide program of information providing consistent and clear information for all motorists entering the City?”

(xxviii)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“How many drivers have attracted ANPR penalty notices on each day since the Lendal Bridge trial closure began, how many notices have been waived or cancelled, and how much revenue has the Council collected from these fines in total?”

(xxix)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Hyman:

“Who took the decision to waive the potential fine income for the first 10 days of the Lendal Bridge trial and under what delegated authority?”

(xxx) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Runciman:

“How many drivers have attracted ANPR penalty notices on each day since the new restrictions on access to Coppergate began, how many notices have been waived or cancelled, and how much revenue has the Council collected from these fines in total?”

(xxxi)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Runciman:

“Could the Cabinet Member provide a breakdown of the ANPR penalty notices issued since the Lendal Bridge closure and Coppergate restrictions by residents living inside York and residents living outside York?”

(xxxii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“Why is the feed from the traffic cameras to the ‘i-travel’ York website map still not working despite the assurances given at the July Council meeting?”

(xxxiii)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“How many faults have been reported on traffic signals in York so far this year, what is the total time that signals have been out of service, and how do these figures compare to the equivalent period last year?”

(xxxiv)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“The Department for Transport website reports that 80% of bus services ran on time in 2011/12. What is the equivalent figure for 2012/13?”

(xxxv) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“What action has the Cabinet member taken since the last Council meeting to ensure that passengers have access to both current and historical information on bus reliability in York?”

(xxxvi)To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Reid:

“During 2011/12 the Council reported that an additional 321 homes (net) had been built in the city of which 151 were "affordable". What are the equivalent figures for 2012/13 and why hasn't the Annual Monitoring Report for last year been published on the Council's website as yet?”

(xxxvii) To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Jeffries:

“The web site for the ‘shop4support’ organisation was launched earlier in the summer. What consultation with prospective users was undertaken before the launch, how much is the project costing taxpayers and how is the Cabinet member ensuring that the information contained on the website is accurate, accessible, comprehensive and up to date?”

(xxxviii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“How many amateur sports clubs were using Mille Crux prior to St. John's takeover and how many are using it now?”

(xxxix) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet Member provide details of the agreement to provide revenue support to York athletics club, specifically when this decision was taken, who took this decision, how much the annual amount is and from what budget the money is being taken?”

(xl) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet Member list the other stadiums the ‘Community Stadium Project Board’ have visited by destination, date and cost?”

(xli) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“What is the predicted contribution from York City Football Club towards the new Community Stadium?”

(xlii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“What is the predicted cost of the new athletics facility at Heslington West?”

(xliii)To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Stronger Communities from Cllr Jeffries:

“Could the Cabinet Member outline the details of the £10,000 ward committee funding paid to Tang Hall Community Centre and the completed scheme?”

Minutes:

Forty three questions had been submitted to the Cabinet Leader and Cabinet Members under Standing Order 11.3(a). The guillotine having fallen at this point, Members agreed to receive written answers to their questions, as set out below:

(i) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr D’Agorne:

“The Living Wage – how many other organisations in the City of York have now signed up to support this initiative by applying it to their own workforce?”

“Quite a number of large organisations have and we will continue to encourage others to sign up so that fair pay is recognised as a key part of the city’s economic identity.

Employers that have announced a commitment to paying the Living Wage and have done so are:

CYC
Aviva
JRF & JRHT
York CAB
York Council for Voluntary Service
York St John University

· Leeds & York NHS Foundation Trust

· Nestle UK

York Teaching Hospital
North Yorkshire Fire & Rescue
North Yorkshire Police
York and North Yorkshire Probation Trust

This list does not include those employers who already paid the Living Wage so had no need to implement it.

Members may have seen the good news that the community-run Golden Ball public house has just indicated it will also pay the Living Wage, so I hope many other businesses of all sizes will follow suit.”

(ii) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Aspden:

“What are the daily results for the city-centre footfall cameras (Parliament Street and Coney Street) since the beginning of August and how do they compare to the same period last year?”

I can go one better and give Coun. Aspden footfall data going back to 2009 and 2007 respectively. What this shows is the long term trend of declining footfall as online shopping competes against the high street for consumer sales. This is happening across the country as the nature of our high streets is challenged.

Parliament Street: 2009 to 2013

Coney Street: 2007 to 2013

Despite this national trend it is pleasing that York has the second lowest rate of shop vacancies in the country.

The arrival of Hiscox in the city, Primark confirming its intention to move into the city centre, the progress being made on the former White Swan hotel and on Piccadilly more generally shows that there is confidence in the city centre as a place to invest and this can only help with footfall.

This can be very easily be contrasted with eight years of Liberal Democrat inaction.

I know Coun. Aspden will argue that the Lendal Bridge trial is responsible for a decline in footfall in the city centre rather than accepting that a national trend is responsible. On the day the trial began Parliament Street saw its second best footfall figures this year. If the Liberal Democrats are against the Lendal bridge trial they should do the honest thing and tell the public this is their position. So far we just have carping at the margins about hours, duration, time of the year and signage.”

(iii) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“Free wi-fi hot spots are as follows:

· Coney Street

· St Helen’s Square

· All Explore and library sites

· York Energise

· Museum Gardens

· Askham Bar Park and Ride Terminus Point

The ongoing costs for our current free wifi hotspots for 2012/13 and 2013/14 are minimal as they are all, with the exception of Museum Gardens, using existing network connections - dark fibre network and internet links (ISP).

The only year on year costs are £3.1k pa for the Museum Gardens fibre as we had to extend the fibre network to provide support for the Mystery Plays and wi-fi. These costs are picked up indirectly by YMT via the financial contribution from the existing YMT client budget within Arts and Culture, and another £1.5k pa for the active network and wi-fi controller equipment that manages and controls the entire CYC public facing wi-fi estate. This additional £1.5k pa is also being covered from within existing revenue streams (as a result of continually effective management of our network provision) and no increase to base budgets was required.

In terms of future aspirations and looking for sponsorship we have 3x wireless projects within our SCC2 programme, all of which are concession based projects and will be secured using Broadband Delivery UK/Department for Culture, Media and Sport (BDUK/DCMS) and private sector funding. We have just started the formal procurement process for the City Centre Wireless project and the other two are still waiting DCMS/BDUK clearance to proceed.

The evaluation criteria as part of awarding any contracts for all 3 wireless projects will contain a blend of user experience, affordability, coverage and revenue/sponsorship.

An element of private sector sponsorship/funding could be based on the use of Council owned street side furniture as wireless access point locations if required. The actual requirements/demand of our on street assets will be confirmed through the procurement process for each project but there are examples of this form of sponsorship that has been demonstrated in other wireless projects within the UK including those in/around London and others like the Leeds-Bradford provision, but as you can imagine, the values do vary depending upon location and footfall.

We can provide further details and information on the levels of sponsorship/revenue for each project as they progress into and through the associated procurement process leading up to award and deployment.”

(iv) To the Cabinet Leader from Cllr Ayre:

“Has any contract been awarded to webcast council meetings and, if so, how and when was this decision was taken?”

“As you will be aware Councillor Scott and I proposed a motion to Full Council trying to deliver this form of open governance in April 2008. The proposals were voted down and there has been some resistance ever since despite the move being encouraged by the current Government.

The contract has been awarded to the Pilot Theatre to web stream the next 12 Cabinet meetings with an option to stream Full Council meetings. The decision to stream Cabinet meetings was made by Cabinet and the decision to contract with Pilot Theatre was made by the Head of Strategy and Partnerships and Procurement.

The decision was based on the maturity of the existing web streaming market and the cost of alternative providers. Once an appropriate framework is in place to provide a range of suppliers, and once City of York Council’s requirements are fully understood, a tender exercise will be undertaken.”

(v) To the Deputy Leader (in relation to her Civic & Democratic Services portfolio)from Cllr Ayre:

“As Councillor Ayre is aware all costs are published on the Council’s website. Future trips are not always known within any financial year and so he will be able to see any future travel when published on the Council’s website.

With regard to travel expenditure I would point Cllr Ayre to the following paragraph taken from the IRP report to Council last October 2012:

The Panel was surprised to see how limited the budget provision was for travel outside of the City. In the Panel’s view it is important that councillors, particularly those holding senior positions, are able to travel to promote the City and to identify opportunities which the City might be able to grasp. The Panel hopes that serious consideration will be given in relation to investment in this important area.

With regard to procedures and reporting requirements to authorise and monitor the value and outcomes of trips, examples of the sort of outcomes the Council would seek are:

· Increased leisure visitors to York

· Inward investment within key sectors

· Learning about a key policy area, especially where it impacts the economy

· Business to business links within a key sector

· Research links within departments at universities

and provides the Council with some clear parameters to help make good decisions informed by consistent rationale.

Foreign business trips are authorised by the Chief Executive in conjunction with the Leader or Deputy Leader.”

(vi) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr D’Agorne:

“As has already been explained to Cllr D’Agorne, weed removal this year has been the same as it has been every other year, in that it has never been done as a matter of course. Due to this and in line with our Smarter York agenda, this work will be undertaken by Community Payback, whose supervisors are required to undertake training to work on the roadside. This training has been programmed for the 4^th October and the work should be completed by November dependent on workload and weather. We have been working to improve how the Council works with Community Payback in order to ensure York taxpayers get the most of this service.”

(vii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Richardson:

“April 2014 is not the start date for the charge for additional green bins. This is an annual charge and not based on a particular season, with residents subscribing for a period of 12 months from the date they subscribe.

(viii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Richardson:

“Collection crews will advise the customer when their bin has been damaged as a result of our collections. This will be done by way of a postcard delivered to the resident’s home by the crew, or if this is not possible, the crew will report it to their supervisor who will inform the YCC. I can confirm that the Council will replace bins damaged by Council staff free of charge.”

(ix) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What work is being undertaken to look at ‘plan B’ alternative to the costly incinerator project that is no longer viable due to the withdrawal of the £65m of PFI loan?”

“It is not true to say that Allerton Park, the energy from waste project that will save York taxpayers millions of pounds, is no longer viable. The Council is committed to continuing the proposal by working with Amey Cespa, and once they have finalised the funding for the facility, a report will be taken to both the City Council and the County Council next year asking Members for a final decision on whether to proceed.”

(x) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Reid:

“Why were new refuse collection arrangements introduced before the Council was in a position to guarantee that bins would be emptied as per the published schedule?”

“Given the mess the Liberal Democrats made of the introduction of fortnightly collections, they should know that with the introduction of new rounds, there is always a period of settling in – both for residents, who are getting used to new collection days or times, and the crews who are learning new rounds. The rounds are thoroughly assessed by crews and supervisors prior to them being introduced using their collective knowledge and experience, but the service does not get any chance to dress rehearse the rounds. In reality, less than half a percent of homes across York have had any issues with their collections during the implementation.”

(xi) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Firth:

“Since the new waste collection arrangements began on 9th September how many bins were not collected on the scheduled collection day?”

“During the implementation period we were collecting 99.88% of bins, so a ‘miss rate’ of 0.12%. In comparison, the miss rate during the move to fortnightly collections under the previous Liberal Democrat administration was around 10%.”

(xii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Firth:

“We have kept overtime to a minimum during the implementation period and only put additional resources out on Saturday mornings, at a total cost of £868. This compares to around £25,000 during the move to fortnightly collections under the previous Liberal Democrat administration.”

(xiii) To the Cabinet Member for Environmental Services from Cllr Reid:

“Will the Cabinet Member apologise publicly to the thousands of York residents who have been inconvenienced by the bungled launch of the revised waste collection service?”

“Given the excellent collection rate during the implementation of what are always difficult changes, I think it more appropriate that the Liberal Democrats apologise for intentionally scaremongering and attempting to mislead the public for political gain.”

(xiv) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Is the Cabinet Member satisfied with the response rate to calls to the Smarter York helpline compared to two years ago?”

“Whilst I am not satisfied with the response rates in recent weeks to calls to the Smarter York helpline, the circumstances which have led to this position, includes other significant pressures on the wider service around welfare benefits changes introduced by the Government. We receive around 800 - 1000 calls per month more than two years ago. However, average performance on calls answered and time taken to answer calls is not greatly different.

An overall review of all customer related system technology is under way and this area will be a focus for our emerging Transformation Programme which will focus on efficiency and effectiveness across all of our customer service channels.

Smarteryork and Operators info 2011
01904 551550 - Switchboard      15-Aug 22-Aug 29-Aug 05-Sep 12-Sep Average
Calls Offered   2980    2932    1859    1921    1752    2288.8
Calls Answered 2478    2666    1532    1449    1411    1907.2
% Answered      83.2    90.9    82.4    75.4    80.5    82.48
Ave time to answer      36 secs 20 secs 30 secs 37 secs 26 secs 30 secs

01904 551551 - SmarterYork      15-Aug 22-Aug 29-Aug 05-Sep 12-Sep Average
Calls Offered   925     824     748     833     985     863
Calls Answered 679     604     599     594     719     639
% Answered      73.4    73.3    80.1    71.3    73      74.22
Average time to answer 1 min 25        1 min 30        1 min 1         1 min 12        1 min 25 sec    1 min 19 sec

Smarteryork and Operators info 2013     Average
01904 551550 Switchboard        19-Aug 26-Aug 02-Sep 09-Sep 16-Sep
Calls Offered   2167    2256    2419    2591    1569    2200.4
Calls Answered 2084    1865    2293    2262    1382    1977.2
% Answered      96      83      95      87      88      89.8
Ave time to answer      15 secs 53 secs 20 secs 38 secs 35 secs 32.2 secs

01904 551551 - SmarterYork      19-Aug 26-Aug 02-Sep 09-Sep 16-Sep
Calls Offered   1044    1658    1753    3192    1175    1764.4
Calls Answered 919     1142    1405    1866    887     1243.8
% Answered      88      68      80      58      74      73.6
Average time to answer 54 secs 1min 59 1min 20 2min 44 1min 25 1min 40 sec

(xv) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Is the council working with the fire service to consider any implications for fire safety and emergency planning following the boat fire at Kings Staith last Saturday?”

“The councils Emergency Planning team work closely with all statutory agencies including the North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service to ensure that plans are in place to reduce emergencies and where they do occur ensure that plans are in place to safely managed the incident and reduce the risk of harm to both individuals and businesses. This pro-active planning includes plans for city centre evacuation and dealing with incidents on the river.

In relation to the boat fire at Kings Staith, the councils emergency planning officer was in attendance at the scene on the night and the multi-agency plans for dealing with emergencies on the river was put in place where necessary. The follow up in relation to the removal of the boat is being dealt with through the boat owners insurance company.”

(xvi) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“Below are the demand statistics for mid August to mid September - the significant increase in calls week beginning 9th September were due in the main to the waste collection changes affecting a large proportion of residents in York. Clearly original estimates of resources needed to meet demand had to be re-evaluated once the real impacts were known, and then adjusted.

The changes were implemented from the following dates:

* w/c 26th August publications re changes were issued and bins stickered

* w/c 9th September go live

Whilst the Smarter York line performance was as quoted in the question in w/b 9th September, this was at the point when lines were two or three times as busy as previous weeks, and improvements were made by the following week.

In the mean time, performance was maintained at around 90% of all calls answered, and below 40 seconds, for the council main Switchboard which also experienced an increase in calls in the same week.”

Smarteryork and Operators info 2011
01904 551550 - Switchboard      15-Aug 22-Aug 29-Aug 05-Sep 12-Sep Average
Calls Offered   2980    2932    1859    1921    1752    2288.8
Calls Answered 2478    2666    1532    1449    1411    1907.2
% Answered      83.2    90.9    82.4    75.4    80.5    82.48
Ave time to answer      36 secs 20 secs 30 secs 37 secs 26 secs 30 secs

01904 551551 - SmarterYork      15-Aug 22-Aug 29-Aug 05-Sep 12-Sep Average
Calls Offered   925     824     748     833     985     863
Calls Answered 679     604     599     594     719     639
% Answered      73.4    73.3    80.1    71.3    73      74.22
Average time to answer 1 min 25        1 min 30        1 min 1         1 min 12        1 min 25 sec    1 min 19 sec

Smarteryork and Operators info 2013     Average
01904 551550 Switchboard        19-Aug 26-Aug 02-Sep 09-Sep 16-Sep
Calls Offered   2167    2256    2419    2591    1569    2200.4
Calls Answered 2084    1865    2293    2262    1382    1977.2
% Answered      96      83      95      87      88      89.8
Ave time to answer      15 secs 53 secs 20 secs 38 secs 35 secs 32.2 secs
                                                Average
01904 551551 - SmarterYork      19-Aug 26-Aug 02-Sep 09-Sep 16-Sep
Calls Offered   1044    1658    1753    3192    1175    1764.4
Calls Answered 919     1142    1405    1866    887     1243.8
% Answered      88      68      80      58      74      73.6
Average time to answer 54 secs 1min 59 1min 20 2min 44 1min 25 1min 40 sec

(xvii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“We aim to answer 80% of our calls within 20 seconds with 95% of calls being answered. In September we received 4500 more calls than expected due to additional demand.

The current response rates are a cause for concern and are due in no small part to the extra 800-1,000 calls per month that we are receiving due to the changes in welfare benefits introduced by the Government that Cllr Cuthbertson supports.”

(xviii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Jeffries:

“The Cabinet decided to offer Oliver House to York CVS subject to business case agreement in May 2012, to set up a hub for various social care services. It was anticipated that there would be a delay before the scheme was up and running and this was reflected in the Cabinet report at the time.

We have worked jointly with CVS to clarify the requirement for a social care hub, the conversion costs and the business case. The initial proposals from York CVS were not affordable so further analysis and options are currently being evaluated and the decision will come back to Cabinet in either Nov or Dec when all new options have been satisfactorily assessed.

The arrangements for the empty building have kept it secure and we are working hard to secure the future use of the building as quickly as possible.”

(xix) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Orrell:

“This information was provided under FOI using a definition provided by ACAS. ACAS also state ‘the term 'zero hours' is not defined in legislation, but is generally understood to be a employment contract between an employer and a worker, which means the employer is not obliged to provide the worker with any minimum working hours, and the worker is not obliged to accept any of the hours offered'.

I can now confirm that we do not have any CYC contracts of this nature but we use casual assignments which have a start and end date at a set rate of pay. This is not a permanent contractual arrangement. Most of these are now commissioned through City of York Trading Ltd (WWY@CYT), with remaining casual staff working direct for council services. All casual work will be transferred to WWY@CYT by the end of March 2014 as per the Cabinet report dated 4 ^th June to be found at:

http://modgov.york.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=733&MId=7638&Ver=4

The current breakdown of known casuals are:

	In a WwY@CYT Assignment	Non WwY@CYT casual (may not be working)
Adults/Children	121	53
Communities & Neighbourhoods	95	388
Customer & Business Support Services	18	78
City & Environmental Services	28	46
Office of the Chief Executive	3	85

TOTAL	265	650

The numbers are much lower than stated at the time of the FOI as all old staff records have now been deleted and only live positions from the 1^st of September are shown.

Numbers of casual assignments can change day by day and week by week across a wide variety of roles, however examples of casual roles used by each directorate are:

• Adults/ Children's Services – Children’s social care, Adult social care (including existing staff which take on additional casual work), drivers, clerical staff, Teacher / tutors, youth workers, early years workers.

• Communities & Neighbourhoods – Housing services, Library staff (inc. drivers and cafe workers), training centre staff, leisure services staff, public protection, tutors.

• Customer & Business Support Services – Cleaning, support services admin staff, electoral services.

• City & Environmental Services Highways, waste, road safety, traffic census, street cleaning.

• Office of the Chief Executive - leaflet distribution.”

(xx) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“To be confirmed.”

(xxi) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Ayre:

“What, if any, legal advice did the Council take before blocking payday loan websites at libraries, Explore centres, West Offices and through the city-centre Wi-Fi provision?”

“Payday loans are a modern day scourge and are a sign of how hard people are finding the cost of living under the Government supported by Cllr Ayre. I welcome the campaign being led by the Archbishop of Canterbury on this matter.

It was therefore right that the Council does what it can to help prevent residents using Council resources to become beholden to spiralling debt.

Councils across the Country have been taking similar action without legal challenge and the informal advice of the Head of Legal Services is that he has no concerns about the move from a legal standpoint.”

(xxii) To the Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance and Customer Service from Cllr Jeffries:

“How many members of staff and per department are trained in ‘Easy Read’?”

“It is not possible to give this analysis until we establish electronic training records next year, but whilst there is no specific structured course currently available through the Workforce Development Unit for Easy Read, this is not to say that this is not being delivered within individual services across the council. Structured Equalities and Diversity training is a key programme of activity to be available to all staff and will support mandatory Customer Service training, and we will ensure accessible information including Easy Read is covered in one or both of these structured programmes.”

(xxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“The Council’s 2008 – 2013 Carbon Management programme (CMP) exceeded its 25% reduction target (delivering projects which achieved a 28% reduction by 31 March 2013). This was highlighted at that time. In addition a 2 stage Green Audit of Council property was undertaken last year and this has highlighted further projects for implementation in coming years. Some of these will be funded through the council’s Salix funding – others by working with colleagues in property and the school planning team.

http://www.york.gov.uk/press/article/1113/council_surpasses_emissions_target

A project log to confirm this is available on request.

The City’s climate change framework and action plan sets a challenging target for 2020 – 40% reduction - the council will surely want to be able to evidence its own contribution to this.

There is no specific target in place for the next 2 years at this point, pending the production of a new plan, but I am expecting to at least deliver additional projects that were identified through the CMP 2008-13, and the green audit, but which have not so far been implemented – that list would see a further 1200t CO2 saving.”

(xxiv)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Will the revised local plan include an assessment of the traffic impact and implications of proposed housing developments at Winthorpe and Land North of Clifton Moor?”

“A consultancy services provider has been commissioned to undertake an assessment of ‘Local Plan Transport Investment Requirements’. This will assess the local and strategic transport investment to demonstrate that the transport infrastructure required to realise the amount and distribution of development being planned for the City of York Local Plan (principally through the Strategic Sites) is viable. More specifically, trips arising from development at each (strategic) site, including Whinthorpe and land north of Clifton Moor will need to be assessed individually and cumulatively. The cumulative assessment is likely to encompass grouping of sites to assess the impacts in specific areas of York, as well as a city-wide cumulative assessment.

In addition to the assessment of infrastructure requirements, the commissioned consultancy services provider will be supporting the council to undertake ‘pre-application’ analysis of the strategic sites. This support will include liaison with the developers/landowners who wish to see their sites come forward for development during the Plan period (2015-2030) and beyond.

The Local Plan contains policies that seek to reduce reliance on private motorised transport and encourage greater modal share of the more sustainable (and active) forms of transport, to minimise the adverse transport impacts of development. Therefore, in undertaking both of the work elements outlined above, the consultancy services provider should have due regard to the modal splits achieved in the eco-town examples in Europe (and other places) for achieving low modal share by private motorised transport in York.”

(xxv) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What existing and additional air quality monitoring is taking place on the inner ring road to assess the impact of the Lendal Bridge closure and Coppergate enforcement measures?”

“The Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) operates an extensive network (over 350) of nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes in the city centre (including Lendal Bridge and the inner ring road) and along key radial routes into the city. EPU also operates a number of continuous air quality monitoring stations at roadside locations including Fishergate, Lawrence Street, Nunnery Lane, Gillygate, Holgate Road, Heworth Green, Plantation Drive and Fulford Road. For more detailed information about air quality monitoring including the latest Progress Reports submitted to DEFRA, please see CYC‘s dedicated air quality website at www.jorair.co.uk

Whilst baseline (pre-trial) air quality data exists for many of the areas around the inner ring road, the air quality impact of the bridge closure will be difficult to quantify precisely, as air quality is heavily influenced by prevailing weather conditions and shows considerable seasonal variation. Consequently, it will only be possible to draw limited conclusions from any road-side measured results and that for the purposes of the trial evaluation an assessment will be made using computer modelling of changes in emissions resultant from changes in vehicle flow on the highway network.”

(xxvi)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr D’Agorne:

“The A19 South Pinch Point funding recently announced by the Department for Transport is principally for transport improvements in the area. The funding will be used to introduce a new left turn free flow lane from the A19 into the Designer Outlet Park & Ride; inbound bus priority lanes on the A19 between A64 and Germany Beck, bus priorities at the Naburn Lane junction and enhancements to the junction at the proposed Germany Beck development. The junction scheme will remove the current flood disruption risk from travellers on the A19. Measures to address flooding on Fordlands Road will be investigated and included in the scheme if possible. There will be no change to the obligations on the developer to deliver the access junction element of the scheme or to the level of their s106 contributions to other measures in the area.”

(xxvii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Richardson:

“The temporary signing around the city for the restriction introduced on Lendal Bridge are aimed at informing those regular users that a change has been implemented that they may have to take note of and amend their previous regular travel pattern. For those drivers less familiar with place names in the city the nationally recognised traffic restriction signs at the point the restriction begins informs the driver of where and when they can and can’t go.

The signing strategy for the city directs inbound drivers to car parks, plus some other significant locations outside the inner ring road such as the National Railway Museum, Hospital, etc. Outbound traffic is directed to the nearest convenient main radial and out to the outer ring road (A64 & A1237).

Providing advance information of restrictions on movement is rarely a practical option in the longer term and normally restricted to an initial period of a few months for major schemes.”

(xxviii)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“We are currently producing weekly figures for the number for PCNs;

Lendal

02-08 Sept - 1675 PCNs issued (4 days enforcement, commenced Wed)

09-15 Sept - 2015 PCNs issued (6 days enforcement, because of the Skyride event)

16-22 Sept - 1766 PCNs issued (5 days enforcement, cameras updating)

TOTAL 5456

Accurate actual income into CYC is not available at this stage due to the short time the system has been operational. Based on £23 / PCN (the £30 ‘early payment’ value of the PCN minus the processing and operating costs), this would equate to a potential income of £125,500. Actual income will be lower than this as a small proportion of PCNs issued will be cancelled for various reasons and so not all PCNs issued will be paid.

It is not possible at this stage to give an accurate figure for cancelled or waived PCNs as this figure would need to include PCNs cancelled at the processing centre and we do not have this information at present.”

(xxix)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Hyman:

“Who took the decision to waive the potential fine income for the first 10 days of the Lendal Bridge trial and under what delegated authority?”

“The Director of City and Environmental Services made the decision based on his authority to discharge any function of Cabinet in relation to: Highways Network Strategy & Management and Transport Planning.”

(xxx) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Runciman:

“We are currently producing weekly figures for the number for PCNs;

Coppergate

15-18 August -1085 PCNs issued (4 days enforcement, commenced Wednesday)

19-25 August - 1741 PCNs issued

26-01 Sept - 880 PCNs issued

02-08 Sept - 850 PCNs issued

09-15 Sept - 841 PCNs issued (6 days enforcement, because of the Skyride event)

16-22 Sept -324 PCNs issued (5 days enforcement, cameras updating and gas works commenced)

TOTAL 5721

Accurate actual income into CYC is not available at this stage due to the short time the system has been operational. Based on £23 / PCN (the £30 ‘early payment’ value of the PCN minus the processing and operating costs). This would equate to a potential income of £131,500. Actual income will be lower than this as a small proportion of PCNs issued will be cancelled for various reasons and so not all PCNs issued will be paid.

(xxxi)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Runciman:

“Coppergate; 1852 individual postcodes recorded. 1280 ‘YO’ postcodes & 572 non-‘YO’ postcodes. This equates to a 70%-30% split

Lendal Bridge: 6340 individual postcodes recorded. 1436 ‘YO’ postcodes & 4904 non-‘YO’ postcodes. This equated to a 22.5%- 77.5% split.”

(xxxii) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“Why is the feed from the traffic cameras to the ‘i-travel’ York website map still not working despite the assurances given at the July Council meeting?”

“The work to get images from the City’s CCTV system onto the YorkLIVE website and mobile applications is ongoing. Unfortunately, our move from an analogue CCTV system to a digital one has required more recoding of the website’s processing system than originally anticipated. This additional work is now almost complete and the CCTV images should be available on the website during October / November. For the mobile applications the updates required will be included in the next update releases of the apps, expected in later this year.”

(xxxiii)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“1^st April 2012 to 1^st April 2013; 573 faults equating to 790 hours of lost service. 1^st April 2013 to 1^st October 2013; 299 faults equating to 804 hours of lost service

The hours of lost service reflects the severity of the faults (more serious faults involve more hours service loss), whereas the fault numbers just reflect the number of call outs. Between April and October 2013, we had a number of serious cabling faults, caused by damaged and flooded ducts. These faults, at sites including George Hudson St and Walmgate Bar have pushed the ‘out of service’ figures up.”

(xxxiv)To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“The Department for Transport website reports that 80% of bus services ran on time in 2011/12. What is the equivalent figure for 2012/13?”

“In the City of York area, 81% of the city’s non-frequent services (5 or fewer services per hour) ran on time (between 59 seconds early and 5 mins 59 secs late) in 2011/12. In 2012/13, the equivalent figure was 82%.

Further details and explanation can be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proportion-of-bus-services-running-on-time”

(xxxv) To the Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability from Cllr Reid:

“What action has the Cabinet member taken since the last Council meeting to ensure that passengers have access to both current and historical information on bus reliability in York?”

“Details of the reliability of bus services in York has been available to the public for many years through statistics published by the Department for Transport. This ensures that bus punctuality is not only compared on an historic basis, but also against many similar towns and cities across the country.

I would also add in relation to an earlier contribution by Councillor Aspden, that the bus usage figures published in the last performance report are substantially in error, reflecting a period in which ticket machine problems meant substantial under-reporting of actual bus usage.”

(xxxvi)To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Reid:

“The collection of annual monitoring reports by the Department for Communities for Local Government (CLG) ceased on January 2012 when the Localism Act (Section 113) came into force. This removes the requirement for annual monitoring reports (AMR) to be made to the Secretary of State (SoS) under Section 35 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. This section amends this requirement so that Local Planning Authorities must publish this information direct to the public at least yearly in the interests of transparency.

Furthermore, in 2011 MP Bob Neil wrote to all Local Planning Authorities outlining the removal of LDF Monitoring; A Good Practice Guide (ODPM 2008), Annual Monitoring Report FAQ & Emerging Practise 2004 -2005 (ODPM 2006) and Regional Spatial and Local Development Framework; Core Output Indicators – Update 2/2008(CLG/2008). The letter also indicated that following removal of these documents ‘It is therefore a matter for each Council to decide what to include in their monitoring reports while ensuring they are prepared in accordance with relevant UK and EU legislation’1.

In addition to this in March 2012 the Department of Communities and Local Government published The Single Data List; a catalogue of all the datasets that local government must submit to central government in a given year. The aim of the list is to facilitate transparency, bring clarity for local authorities and the public as to what data central government collects and what should be available to them. Both the 5 year housing land supply (ref 023 of CLG Single Data List) and the Annual Monitoring Report (ref 024) have now been removed from the Single Data List and local planning authorities are no longer required to submit these to the Secretary of State.

An interim AMR was published in March 2013 with a commitment to publish a full AMR following the publication of the Preferred Options Local Plan. The interim AMR presents the quantitative land use monitoring analysis for 2011/12 including net completions to October 2012. This fulfils the requirement set out above for Local Authorities to publish information direct to the public.

In addition to this some individual members of the public have requested more up to date information on completions (to April 2013) following the year end on 1st April and also details on planning consents for 11/12 and 12/13 all of which was supplied as requested and would be made available to any other member of the public if they requested this. We will imminently be updating the current Annual Monitoring Report webpage to include information to the year end (1st April 2013) on net housing completions and consents.

As the Local Plan moves forward through the preparation stages the indicators in the AMR will evolve to meet the delivery and monitoring requirements of NPPF. We now have monitoring figures available for net housing completions and planning consents to 1^st April 2013 and will be publishing these as an update to the Interim AMR along with details of the forward supply of housing for the Local Plan period as published in the Local Plan Preferred Options which we consulted on between June and July 2013. This gives details of potential sites allocated for housing in the Local Plan Preferred Options along with a broad indication of their phasing over the plan period to 2030.

The total net housing completions for the monitoring period 1^st April 2012 to 31^st March 2013 was 482 which includes 124 student cluster flats. The inclusion of non-institutional student accommodation within housing completion figures is in line with CLG guidance on housing monitoring.

The total gross number of affordable homes completed over the same period was 122. Please note that affordable housing is measured in gross terms i.e. the number of dwellings completed, through new build, acquisitions and conversions. This does not take account of losses through sales of affordable housing and demolitions. Please note that homes are counted as completed when either: they are transferred from a developer to a registered provider (Housing Association) or when the Registered Provider informs the HCA of their completion and makes a claim for final grant payment on this basis. These completion figures for affordable housing are gross and no adjustment has been made for existing affordable homes that have been sold under the Right to Buy or otherwise disposed of. This is in accordance with Government requirements on reporting affordable housing completions.”

(xxxvii) To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Jeffries:

“The ability to use the website was made available to the City of York Council through the Regional ADASS in late 2011 at no initial cost to the Council. The set up programme has recently ended and so the site has recently gone live – a formal launch is currently being planned.

Whilst there is no cost to CYC for the website at present, there are ongoing conversations regionally about whether Local Authorities will be willing to underwrite the site for up to £15k a year – CYC has not yet made a decision.

York information is kept up to date through the Family Information Service which has a strong record of providing an excellent children’s information site.

The ‘design’ and format of the site is a national one designed by a group associated with ‘In Control’, an organisation which has strong links to people who use services and their carers and was set up as they sought, and felt the need for, an e-market place for services.”

(xxxviii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“How many amateur sports clubs were using Mille Crux prior to St. John's takeover and how many are using it now?”

“Prior to the purchase I understand that the site was home to a cricket team, a football team, a rugby team, a bowls club and a flyball club.

(For those members who are not conversant with the noble sport of flyball, it essentially consists of people and dogs running around over obstacles together and is the fastest growing dog sport in the UK.)

On site now there is the cricket team, the bowls club, and the flyball club, whilst the rugby club has now grown and now has 2 teams. The football club moved to New Earswick because they wanted access to a bar and club house.

The site has obtained planning permissions for two new 3G astroturf pitches, two floodlit netball courts, and three floodlit tennis courts, all of which will have community access. The university has further plans for development of the site which will offer facilities for community junior football and enhanced access for recreational walking and running. It is set to become a major community sports asset.

My thanks to Cllr Ayre for reminding council of how far this Labour Administration has moved towards developing strong partnership arrangements resulting in a far more strategic approach to community sports provision in the city. One which I’m confident will see an increase in that provision.”

(xxxix)To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“The provision of a grant for the delivery of community athletics has been agreed as part of Heads of Terms between the University of York, the City of York Athletic Club and the Council for the provision of the new athletics facilities.

The grant will be provided as a single one off payment of £31k; this will come from the Council’s budget for the delivery of the athletics facilities. It will not be an ongoing commitment or constitute revenue support. The grant requires the Athletic Club to establish an expanded sports development programme on the new site during the transition period. The Council gives capital and revenue grants to support community voluntary sports clubs where they are contributing to their community and improving health and physical activity participation rates.

The decision to fund the Athletics project was taken at Cabinet on 6th March 2012, as was the authority for officers to develop the proposals.

The Community Stadium Project Board makes decisions regarding the delivery of the project. An update report for the Community Stadium is to be taken to Cabinet on 4th December 2013, this will cover all detailed authorities required to secure the delivery of the proposal covered by the Heads of Terms.”

(xl) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet Member list the other stadiums the ‘Community Stadium Project Board’ have visited by destination, date and cost?”

“Cllr Ayre asks what “other stadiums” the Community Stadium Project Board has visited and I’m not at all sure why he asks about “other stadiums” as it implies the Community Stadium Project Board as a body have visited at least one “other” stadium, however, the Community Stadium Project Board as a body has not visited any stadiums since inception.

However, Members of the Board, individually, over the years have probably visited many stadiums in either a personal or business capacity. Indeed as Cllr Ayre is most painfully aware and is unlikely to ever forget or live down, I visited Wembley Stadium as a guest of York City FC on one occasion when he was also there.

If the question relates to individual Members of the board acting on official council business, this information can be provided if helpful to Cllr Ayre.”

(xli) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“What is the predicted contribution from York City Football Club towards the new Community Stadium?”

“York City Football Club’s financial contribution to the new stadium will be made up by a capital contribution and an ongoing rental payment. This will be governed by a detailed Match day Agreement which will set out the terms of occupation. The details of the Match Day Agreement are currently under discussion between the parties and their legal advisors.

Details regarding the level of capital contribution to be made by the Football Club were covered in the Cabinet report of 6^th March 2012. The Football Club remain committed to paying up to £2 m subject to the risks and issues covered in that report, mainly related to the disposal of Bootham Crescent.”

(xlii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Tourism from Cllr Ayre:

“What is the predicted cost of the new athletics facility at Heslington West?”

“It would not be in the commercial interest of the Council or its partners, involved in the delivery of this project, to disclose details regarding estimated costs.

The University of York will soon be preparing competitive tenders for the works, publishing prior to the award of contract would undermine the ability to secure the most commercially advantageous price.

I can however confirm that the cost to the Council remains within the £2m budget agreed for the delivery of the athletics facilities on 6^th March 2012.”

(xliii) To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Stronger Communities from Cllr Jeffries:

“Could the Cabinet Member outline the details of the £10,000 ward committee funding paid to Tang Hall Community Centre and the completed scheme?”

“Contributions were made as follows:

£3,000 from Hull Road Ward Committee

£6,615 from Heworth Ward Committee

£2,000 from Housing

The aim of the project was to support residents in an area of relative deprivation by creating a space that would be attractive to partner organisations to deliver relevant services to be identified locally especially in relation to debt and poverty.

The committee decided to make alterations to the building which would create 2 confidential office spaces and an accessible independent entrance for the users of the first floor of the building, releasing the lounge area which could then be used as a self-contained space rather than also acting as an access corridor. Working with colleagues in CYC the committee has drawn up the necessary plan and these are currently in the system as a planning application.