Agenda item
Questions to Executive Leader and Executive Members received under Standing Order 10(c)
(i) From Cllr Brian Watson to the Executive Leader
“Would the Leader of the Council explain why so many residents did not receive notice of the public meeting about the relocation of the Peasholme Centre and will he urgently organise another meeting to ensure proper consultation with residents?”
(ii) From Cllr Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Can the Executive Member inform Council on which other routes in the city the ‘ftr’ is being considered for, as reported in the Corporate Strategy 2006-2011?”
(iii) From Cllr Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Could the Executive Member describe what action she plans to take, in the next 6 months, in relation to growing congestion on York's arterial routes during rush hour, in particular to help with the running of buses?”
(iv) From Cllr Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Would the Executive Member agree to bring forward at the earliest possible date, a Supplementary Planning Guidance to stop the conversion of 2 bed terraced houses into flats, due to the effect that this is having on the supply of starter homes, and that at recent Planning Appeals CYC Policy H8 has been seen to contradict Policy H9 of the North Yorkshire County Structure Plan, with CYC decisions for refusal being overturned?”
(v) From Cllr Moore to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Can the Executive Member confirm that we have achieved all our Planning Targets for the year and should therefore no longer be designated a Standards Authority after 30th June?”
(vi) From Cllr Potter to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services explain why there is a two tier system of street cleaning operating in the City, where terraced areas are only swept once or twice a year when gullies are cleaned whilst the remainder of the City streets are swept on a 40 day cycle? Please can he also give his assurance that the imminent review of street cleaning will address this inequality and ensure that terraced areas receive the same level of service enjoyed by the rest of the City?”
(vii) From Cllr Holvey to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Would the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods not agree that the timely removal of graffiti is of key concern to residents and say what the Council is doing to achieve this?”
(viii) From Cllr Vassie to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Would the Executive Member give details of the recycling levels that the Council and partners have achieved in the City?”
(ix) From Cllr R Watson to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Could the Executive Member give an update on progress with the Eco Depot?”
(x) From Cllr Aspden to the Executive Member for Social Inclusion and Youth
“How has the Executive Member responded to the recommendations made in the Inclusive Decision Making Scrutiny Report?”
Minutes:
In accordance with Standing Order 10 (c) (1) the following questions were put and responses given:
(i) From Councillor Brian Watson to the Executive Leader
“Would the Leader of the Council explain why so many residents did not receive notice of the public meeting about the relocation of the Peasholme Centre and will he urgently organise another meeting to ensure proper consultation with residents?”
The Executive Leader replied:
“In relation to the streets to be leafleted, these were agreed between officers and Ward Members.
The streets where some residents are claiming to officers that apparently leaflets hadn't been delivered were Ogleforth and Aldwark, two streets that Cllr Watson asked to be included and which are on the distribution list. There were no concerns raised with officers over the area leafleted surrounding the Fishergate site.
Written confirmation has been received from the contractor to the effect that leaflets were delivered to all homes in the streets on the list.
I am happy for an officer to attend the Guildhall Ward Committee meeting on 13th July to answer any outstanding questions that residents may have.”
(ii) From Councillor Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Can the Executive Member inform Council on which other routes in the city the ‘ftr’ is being considered for, as reported in the Corporate Strategy 2006-2011?”
The Executive Member replied:
“There are no plans to extend the use of the ftr at the present time. It is possible that in the future it will be considered for use in public transport links connected with the York Central development.”
(iii) From Councillor Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Could the Executive Member describe what action she plans to take, in the next 6 months, in relation to growing congestion on York's arterial routes during rush hour, in particular to help with the running of buses?”
The Executive Member replied:
“Congestion levels are not increasing in the City. Our plans continue to be to encourage residents to walk or cycle to destinations when ever possible, thus minimizing demand for road space.”
(iv) From Councillor Simpson-Laing to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Would the Executive Member agree to bring forward at the earliest possible date, a Supplementary Planning Guidance to stop the conversion of 2 bed terraced houses into flats, due to the effect that this is having on the supply of starter homes, and that at recent Planning Appeals CYC Policy H8 has been seen to contradict Policy H9 of the North Yorkshire County Structure Plan, with CYC decisions for refusal being overturned?”
The Executive Member replied:
“The issue of the conversion of terraces houses and other properties into flats will be considered as part of the on going work on the Local Development Framework. More specifically it is proposed this will be considered as part of the production of the Development Control Development Plan Document. The inclusion of suitable policy approach within a development plan document will clearly have considerably more weight than a draft SPG.”
(v) From Councillor Moore to the Executive Member for City Strategy
“Can the Executive Member confirm that we have achieved all our Planning Targets for the year and should therefore no longer be designated a Standards Authority after 30th June?”
The Executive Member replied:
“I am absolutely delighted to be able to report that we have met, and indeed exceeded, the Government targets in the current assessment period 1st July 05 to 30th June 06.
Majors are at 75.47% compared to a target of 60%, Minors at 70.06% (target 65%) and Others at 86.87% (target 80%).
I would ask Members to remember that we have achieved these results from an incredible low base. In 2002/03 a mere 18% of major applications were determined within the 13 week timescale, minors languished at 39% and others were a measly 59%. I think that you would agree with me that we have achieved great results and I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank all the Officers in Development Control whose hard work and commitment has enabled this major turn around in performance to take place.
So long as the Government don’t move the goal posts I am confident that the standards status will be lifted.”
(vi) From Councillor Potter to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services explain why there is a two tier system of street cleaning operating in the City, where terraced areas are only swept once or twice a year when gullies are cleaned whilst the remainder of the City streets are swept on a 40 day cycle? Please can he also give his assurance that the imminent review of street cleaning will address this inequality and ensure that terraced areas receive the same level of service enjoyed by the rest of the City?”
The Executive Member replied:
“The 40 day cycle refers to the two large and two small mechanical sweepers. These vehicles can not operate in areas with a significant number of parked cars. In most cases, this is terraced streets where residents do not have off street parking, however, it other areas with similar parking difficulties are also affected.
Through York Pride we have increased the frequency of Terrace sweeping over the last two years, and we are achieving, on average approximately a 10 month cycle. Prior to this it was over a year between sweeps.
All Street Cleaning operations including arrangements for terraced properties will be assessed as part of the review commencing in July 2006 to further enhance York Pride.”
(vii) From Councillor Holvey to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Would the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods not agree that the timely removal of graffiti is of key concern to residents and say what the Council is doing to achieve this?”
The Executive Member replied:
“The timely removal of graffiti is a key concern to residents therefore the Council has established monitoring arrangements within the City Centre and in our Neighbourhoods to identify graffiti before arranging for it to be removed.
Street Environment Officers through their work with ward members during walkabouts, and their general monitoring responsibilities are key to the identification and response to graffiti on both public and private land. The proactive service delivered has allowed us to exceed our targets as follows:
The average performance for 2005/6 was:
COLI 77a Average time taken to remove obscene graffiti –
Target 2 days
Actual 1.98 days.”
(viii) From Councillor Vassie to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Would the Executive Member give details of the recycling levels that the Council and partners have achieved in the City?”
The Executive Member replied:
“The total waste arising was 3,500 tonnes less than last year. This has bucked the national trend of 3% waste growth and brings us in 5% below our own challenging target.
The tonnes of recycling are:
· 16,100 tonnes recycled
· 7,400 tonnes composted
Making the annual recycling 24.08% of the waste arising against the government set target of 18%.
We have 12 partner groups we have worked with us this year and they collected a total of 220 tonnes of recycling and composting material which is included in the above figures.”
(ix) From Councillor Richard Watson to the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services
“Could the Executive Member give an update on progress with the Eco Depot?”
The Executive Member replied:
“The contractor, Mowlem, is currently on programme and practical completion is scheduled for 30th September 2006.
Plans are being drawn up to enable relocation of services to the new depot over a 6 week period that begins on the 1st October 2006. This will give Keyland Gregory possession of the existing depot site on the 10th November 2006. Staff are being consulted and a project plan will shortly be produced so that the move can be managed without disruption to our customers.
Issues around the 'Eco - sustainability' agenda are progressing. The majority of the straw panels are in place on the new office building, the roof is being installed to include photo voltaic cells that will contribute to the energy needs of the site. A new planning application has been made for the wind-turbine on a smaller scale. Rainwater harvesting is also being included in the scheme.”
(x) From Councillor Aspden to the Executive Member for Social Inclusion and Youth
“How has the Executive Member responded to the recommendations made in the Inclusive Decision Making Scrutiny Report?”
The Executive Member replied:
“I am pleased that the final report of the Inclusive Decision Making Scrutiny Panel was reported to the Executive on June 13th. The recommendations were accepted subject to the usual financial constraints, although the first, and most significant, recommendation regarding the establishment of a Social Inclusion Working Group had been pre-empted by the Constitutional Review. What is important now is to get the Working Group up and running with a work plan. The first meeting of SIWG is scheduled to take place in July.
The establishment of a Disabled Persons Forum, as outlined in the scrutiny report, to feed into the Working Group will be a priority. I am delighted to be able to confirm this evening that the former DPAG budget will be available to the SIWG. This small pot will enable SIWG to develop its role in ensuring that inclusive decision making is high on the Council's agenda.”