Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2023 as an accurate record.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2023 were agreed as an accurate record.

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) and other registrable and non-registrable interests they may have in relation to any item(s) of business on today’s agenda.

There were none.

To receive notice of any business not on the agenda which in the opinion of the Chair, by reason of special circumstances, be considered as a matter of urgency.

There were no items of urgent business.

The Sub-Committee is provided the latest Financial Performance Monitoring report, to review by exception, with a view to considering whether it is reassured about the delivery of the 2023-24 Sustainable Communities, Regeneration & Economic Recovery Budget.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 21 to 56 of the agenda that provided the Cabinet Report on Period 4 Financial Performance for Members to ascertain whether they are reassured about the delivery of the 2022-23 Sustainable Communities, Regeneration & Economic Recovery (SCRER) Budget. The Corporate Director of SCRER introduced the item.

The Sub-Committee highlighted the predicted underachievement of income for parking, parking enforcement and moving traffic offences, and asked what steps were being taken to rectify this. The Corporate Director of SCRER explained that this covered a number of income streams, and that these were being constantly monitored against behavioural changes, and that there was ongoing work with utility companies on charges for street works. The consultation on the revised Parking Policy had concluded, and the outcomes of this would be coming forward over the coming months.

The Chair highlighted comments made at Cabinet around bin charges, and asked for some additional detail. The Head of Environment Services & Sustainable Neighbourhoods explained that a proposal was being prepared for Cabinet around implementing an administration charge for refuse containers, due to the current unprecedented demand; this charge would not cover recycling containers. There was currently a six-week backlog for refuse container deliveries, and as a result, resource to deliver this had been increased.

Members asked why demand for refuse containers was at the current high level, and heard that this was a mixture of wear and tear on containers, the quality of some containers and better recycling education. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment explained that there were issues with the qualities of some bins, which were being investigated, and ongoing work on how the contractor was handling containers. The Sub-Committee asked if this learning would be fed into the procurement of the new Waste and Street Cleansing Contract, and heard that it would be, in combination with soft market testing, and resident and Member engagement groups.

Members asked about any risks to the Council resulting from the new Roads and Street Works Act, owing to delays and disputes with utility companies. The Corporate Director for SCRER explained that there were processes in place to escalate slow or non-payment from utility companies, and that this could include face-to-face meetings. In some areas, the Council was working through data to find agreement on the amounts that were due, and in other areas, the Council was working with the companies to try to understand why these payments had not been made or were late. There were some historical disputes that had also led to pressures on this area of the budget.

To receive a presentation on the Council’s Air Quality Action Plan 2023-2028 to allow the Sub-Committee to provide early feedback in advance of the full report to Cabinet in December 2023.

The Sub-Committee received the presentation in the agenda supplement, concerning the Council’s Air Quality Action Plan 2023-2028 to allow the Sub-Committee to provide early feedback in advance of the full report to Cabinet in December 2023. The Cabinet Members for Streets and Environment introduced the item, and the Head of Environmental Health, Trading Standards & Licensing went through the presentation found at Appendix A in the agenda. It was highlighted that the figure on the second slide should say that air pollution ‘contributed to the premature deaths of an estimated 4,000 Londoners in 2019’.

The Chair noted that some of the papers had been late for the publication of the agenda, and highlighted the importance of receiving papers in a timely manner. The Chair also noted that this paper lacked some detail. The Corporate Director for SCRER apologised for the lateness of the papers, but noted that this was not for a lack of effort on the part of officers, who always strived to meet report deadlines. Members were informed that the full paper on the Air Quality Action Plan 2023-2028 for Cabinet had been delayed to the January 2023 meeting, and that this report was a high-level update.

The Sub-Committee asked what the Council could do to tackle pollution that originated outside of the borough. The Head of Environmental Health, Trading Standards & Licensing explained there were a number of sources of pollution external to the borough, and that the aspiration of the Plan was to reduce and control pollution where possible. In response to questions on what Croydon had done previously, it was explained that Croydon was the first to implement ‘airTexts’, which provided text updates on pollution to those with lung and heart conditions, and to investigate and provide enforcement (where there was non-compliance) on idling vehicles. Enforcement on idling vehicles was generally undertaken around schools, but could also include where buses were idling outside of bus garages. Croydon had been the first borough to introduce standardised construction logistics plans for all construction sites to reduce emissions.

The Chair asked how Croydon’s Plan would connect with the Mayor of London’s air quality programmes. The Head of Environmental Health, Trading Standards & Licensing explained that the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) had been expanded to cover Croydon in August 2023, and was a statutory requirement.

In response to how Croydon’s Plan compared with neighbours, the Pollution Team Manager explained that these Plans were standardised and so were similar to neighbours, but that Croydon’s Plan also focussed on specific local issues, such as improving air quality near schools (due to the high number in Croydon), and to improve air quality around construction (due to the high number of building sites in the borough). The work around standardised construction logistics plans had been used by Transport for London across the city and fed out to other boroughs. The Sub-Committee heard that Croydon undertook joint projects with other boroughs to maximise available funding, such as a current project on wood burning. Whilst  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29/23

To receive an update on the Council’s work on the Mayor’s priority for delivering ‘Cleaner Croydon’. The Sub-Committee will also receive feedback on its recommendations concerning the Waste & Recycling Contract.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 57 to 82 of the agenda, which provided an update on the Council’s work on the Mayor’s priority for delivering ‘Cleaner Croydon’ and feedback on its recommendations concerning the Waste & Recycling Contract. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment and Interim Director of Streets and Environment introduced the item and went through the presentation at Appendix A.

The Sub-Committee asked about the Council’s implementation of the ‘Love Clean Streets’ app and asked what other methods the Council was using to ensure that reporting was taking place and ensure issues were not missed. The Head of Environment Services & Sustainable Neighbourhoods explained that the ‘Love Clean Streets’ app was fully integrated into Council and contractor back-office systems, but that the learning from the Norbury and Pollards Hill ‘blitz’ was that the value of in-person engagement with stakeholders and residents could not be understated. Members heard that engagement had already begun with residents, stakeholders and Ward Councillors for Thornton Heath (the next ‘blitz’ area) to gain local intelligence in advance of the clean; an initial site inspection had taken place with a small group of stakeholders to gauge their concerns and priorities.

The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment explained that the Council had employed new Client Officers who would gain local intelligence to fill in the gaps where there was underreporting through the ‘Love Clean Streets’ app.  Members heard that the ‘blitz’ approach helped officers gather detail on how well reporting through the app was working, and that work on improving and streamlining the Council’s implementation of the app to make it more intuitive was ongoing. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment stated that it was being investigated if a ‘Friends and Champions’ section of the app could be added to give a better indication of who was reporting what, and where.

The Chair queried whether the additional data gathered by the new Client Officers and through engagement would be used to change the areas prioritised for the ‘blitz’ cleans. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment responded that, whilst data from the app was a good starting point and had been used to choose the priority for the initial list, it was acknowledged that some areas were underreported. The Head of Environment Services & Sustainable Neighbourhoods explained that anecdotal data from the Client Officers and contractors would be combined with app data to gain a fuller picture on which areas would most benefit from a ‘blitz’ approach; it was highlighted that these cleans were in addition to normal core services. It was envisaged that the ‘blitz’ cleans be a rolling programme that serviced all 17 of Croydon’s district centres, and did not require one clean to finish before the next one started.

The Chair commented on the ‘Love Clean Streets’ app, and asked what lessons were being learned from the simpler implementations in other boroughs. The Head of Environment Services & Sustainable Neighbourhoods explained that in some cases the app was not integrated with back-office systems, as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30/23

For the reasons set out in the report, the Streets & Environment Sub-Committee is recommended:

1.               To note this report, the proposed changes to the Local Plan 2018 and the publication of the Local Plan Review for a second consultation under Regulation 19 of the of the Town and Country Planning (Local Plan) Regulations 2012; and,

2.               To consider whether it wishes to make any comments on the proposed changes to the Local Plan 2018 to be taken account of by the Executive.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 83 to 94 of the agenda, which provided an update on the proposed changes to the Local Plan 2018 and the publication of the Local Plan Review for a second consultation. The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration introduced the item and went through a presentation summarising the report.

The Sub-Committee asked what would happen if Croydon Area Remodelling Scheme (CARS) and Brighton Main Line Upgrade did not go ahead as planned. The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration responded that the Council needed to have policies in place for the scheme should it go ahead, but that the actual funding for the scheme would come from the Department for Transport. The Head of Spatial Planning, Growth Zone and Regeneration explained that the Local Plan would set out how the scheme should be accommodated should it be funded. The Sub-Committee heard that the scheme was unfunded at this time, but including it in the Local Plan would mean that the Council was well placed should a Transport Works Act Order Inquiry come forward.

Members asked what work was being done to engage developers and partners in realising the ambitions of the Local Plan. The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration explained that there were regular meetings with partners (including residents and developers). The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration and the Mayor regularly meet with developers to discuss major developments, as well as pre-application discussions with officers. The Director of Planning & Sustainable Regeneration explained that development of the Local Plan was a regulated process that set out clear expectations on engagement to ensure all those affected by the Plan were able to contribute their views. There had been a large amount of engagement with residents and communities, as well as landowners (through previous consultations and calls for sites). The Council had a large database of partners and organisations to facilitate its engagement; this included the Greater London Authority (GLA), Transport for London (TfL), Network Rail and others. Engagement work was fundamental to the development of the Local Plan to ensuring it was fit for purpose, and had to be demonstrated when it was submitted for examination before a planning inspector.

The Sub-Committee asked if the existing local masterplans would be changed to better align with the revised Local Plan. The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration responded that there was harmonisation across the various local masterplans, and the Head of Spatial Planning, Growth Zone and Regeneration explained that unadopted masterplans would not be adopted until the Local Plan had been agreed, and that these would be checked to ensure that they were properly aligned. Members asked if neighbouring masterplans accounted for each other, and heard that this was the case.

Members asked about increases in ‘build to rent’ properties, and queried whether the Local Plan addressed this. The Cabinet Member for Planning & Regeneration explained that the Council could not restrict developers in this way; however, the Local Plan would look to put restrictions on large-scale co-living  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31/23

The Streets & Environment Sub-Committee is presented with an up to date list of responses from Cabinet to recommendations made by the Sub-Committee for review.

The Sub-Committee noted the report.

The Sub-Committee is asked to:

1.     Note the draft work programme for 2023-24, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

2.     Consider whether there are any changes to the work programme that should be considered.

The Sub-Committee commented on the possibility of adding the following to its work programme:

• Vision Zero
• Road Safety, illegal parking and 20mph
• Street Lighting