Agenda and draft minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and conveyed a special welcome to Charlotte Owen from the Wales Audit Office who was in attendance to observe proceedings as part of fieldwork for the national study on Scrutiny ‘Fit for the Future’.

Councillors Meirick Davies and Merfyn Parry

No declaration of interest had been raised.

No urgent matters had been raised.

To receive the minutes of the Communities Scrutiny Committee held on 30 November 2017 (copy enclosed).

The minutes of the Committee’s meeting held on 30 November 2017 were submitted.

Matters Arising – Page 9, Item No. 5 Tourist Direction Signs for the Vale of Clwyd – A detailed breakdown of costs associated with the Tourism Signs project as requested by members at the last meeting had been included within the Committee’s information brief (previously circulated).  The next meeting of the Working Group established to progress delivery of the project had been scheduled for 19 January 2018.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 30 November 2017 be received and approved as a correct record.

To consider a report by the Countryside and Heritage Services Manager (copy enclosed) which seeks the Committee’s views on a new approach and procedure for managing activities relating to trees across the county

10.05am – 10.35am  

The Lead Member for Housing, Regulation and Environment and the Head of Highways and Environmental Services introduced the Countryside and Heritage Manager’s report (previously circulated) and informed members that their views were sought on a draft procedure for managing all activities relating to trees across the county.  They explained that the decision to draw up a procedure had stemmed from a recent service challenge exercise which had highlighted the need for a written procedure and guidance to assist officers across the authority to answer tree management queries.  As a number of Council services had trees located in and around their premises, tree management was an authority-wide responsibility.  An easily accessible and user friendly procedure was therefore needed to help officers deal with enquiries relating to their management.  The existence of such a procedure would also assist the Council to fulfil its legal obligations as a landowner, its regulatory duties under Planning Acts, and to support the delivery of a number of elements within the Environment Priority of the new Corporate Plan, whilst at the same time supporting its biodiversity ambitions.  The draft procedure’s presentation to the Committee for members’ comments formed part of the consultation process on its contents.  Once approved it would be published on the Council’s website and intranet, and a reader friendly Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document would be produced for ease of reference purposes.

Prior to inviting questions from Committee members the Chair welcomed Councillor Hugh Irving to the meeting and invited him to address the Committee, as Councillor Irving had formally requested that Scrutiny examine the need for a county-wide policy or procedure to deal with trees.  In his address Councillor Irving welcomed the procedure, citing examples of problems caused by overgrown trees etc. from his experience as a councillor.  He endorsed the suggestion of having an easy-read summary version of the procedure which would be useful to officers, councillors and residents alike.

Responding to members’ questions the Corporate Director: Economy and Community Ambition, Head of Highways and Environmental Services and the Countryside and Heritage Services Manager –

·         confirmed that the fundamental principle for having a written procedure for dealing with trees was to protect trees across the county wherever possible, by ensuring that felling a tree would be a last resort i.e. if it was causing a hazard or posing a danger.  This aspect was covered in Section 15 of the draft procedure

·         advised that trees deemed to be ‘obstructing natural light’ to a property would not be classed as a hazard and therefore would not be felled or pruned on that basis

·         explained the process for applying a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) and advised that TPOs were not time limited.  If it was deemed necessary to fell a tree protected by a TPO an application would have to be made for a revocation, or a variation, of the order.  If the Council permitted the revocation/variation it could do so on the grounds that a replacement tree was planted and that the replacement tree also be subject to a TPO.  The majority of trees subject to TPOs were located on private land, not on Council owned land

·         confirmed that the Council’s new Corporate Plan contained a strategy for addressing the lack of trees in certain areas of the county

·         advised that the Planning and Public Protection Department employed a TPO officer who dealt with TPO related enquiries, whilst both the Highways and Property Services undertook risk assessments in relation to trees;

·         advised that there was a ‘self-service’ area on the Council’s Planning Service portal which residents, councillors and staff could use to check if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider a report by the Scrutiny Coordinator (copy enclosed) seeking a review of the committee’s forward work programme and updating members on relevant issues.

10.35am – 11am

The Scrutiny Coordinator submitted a report (previously circulated) seeking members’ review of the Committee’s work programme and provided an update on relevant issues.

Discussion focused on the following –

·         the three items on the work programme for the Committee’s next meeting were re-affirmed and it was agreed to invite the relevant Lead Cabinet Members to that meeting; it was also agreed that the meeting be webcast;

·         members noted that the Scrutiny Chairs and Vice Chairs Group would be meeting that afternoon to consider a number of potential items for scrutiny which may impact on the Committee’s future work programme

·         reference was made to the Committee’s information brief which included an update on actions from the last meeting together with further information as requested; a separate information report had also been circulated detailing the consultation process undertaken in relation to the Ruthin Primary Education Review as requested by the Committee at its meeting on 19 October 2017

·         members were encouraged to attend a training session held at 9.30 a.m. on Monday 29 January 2018 in the Council Chamber, County Hall, Ruthin on scrutinising education related matters which would be facilitated jointly by the Council’s Education Staff and GwE.

RESOLVED that, subject to the above, the forward work programme as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report be approved.

To receive any updates from Committee representatives on various Council Boards and Groups

11am – 11.05am

Committee representatives reported upon their attendance at meetings as follows –

Councillor Rachel Flynn reported upon the Community Services Service Challenge when a range of issues had been discussed including support respite for carers; connecting communities and how to further promote links; dealing with homelessness and funding issues.  All present had been satisfied that issues were being well managed within the service.  Formal notes of the meeting would be circulated to members in the usual manner in the Committee’s information brief.

As the Chair had been unable to attend the Strategic Investment Group (SIG) meeting he asked Councillor Julian Thompson-Hill to provide some feedback.  Details of SIGs recommendations for capital allocations for particular projects had been previously circulated to members and would be submitted to Cabinet prior to full Council for formal approval.  Councillor Thompson-Hill referred to the work of SIG in reviewing bids for allocations highlighting that demand far exceeded the funding available with many projects being scaled back following risk assessment.

Councillor Graham Timms had attended the Schools Standards Monitoring Group and noted that the three scrutiny representatives were all former teachers and he considered that a more diverse mix of representatives may be appropriate.  He also asked whether arrangements could be made to appoint substitutes in the event that representatives were unable to attend.  The Scrutiny Coordinator confirmed that one substitute representative had already been appointed.  It was noted that Performance Scrutiny Committee would be considering general performance issues across schools at future meetings following which school representatives may be invited to future meetings to discuss individual schools performance.

RESOLVED that the verbal reports be received and noted.

At this juncture (11.25 a.m.) the meeting adjourned for a refreshment break.

RESOLVED that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 14 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

To consider a confidential report by the Programme Manager - Business Change (Facilities, Housing and Assets) (copy enclosed) which seeks the Committee’s views on how the Council proposes to manage or dispose of redundant school sites

11.20am – 12pm

The Lead Member for Finance, Performance and Strategic Assets introduced the Facilities, Assets and Housing Programme Manager’s (Business Change) confidential report (previously circulated) which outlined how the Council proposed to manage and dispose of redundant school sites going forward.  The Committee had requested the information following a discussion, at an earlier meeting, on the implementation of the recommendations which had arisen from the review of primary education in the Ruthin area.

During his introduction the Lead Member advised the Committee that the Council’s aim when dealing with redundant schools sites was to realise maximum benefits from them for the Authority and the community, whilst at the same time ensuring that they did not become eyesore sites which incurred excessive maintenance liabilities and therefore be a drain on valuable financial resources.  He also highlighted the complexities which surrounded the ownership of some school buildings and sites, including restrictive clauses and covenants, trusteeships and land ownership issues etc.  Attached to the report was a plan for redundant school sites which included information on each currently redundant site, or sites which were anticipated to become redundant within the next two years, details of their ownership and the Council’s current proposals for those sites.  Also attached was a document outlining the approach taken by the Council once a former school was designated surplus to requirements.

Members were advised by the Lead Member that as a result of past experiences the Council now set a time limit for community use interest to be registered and for an evidenced-based business plan to be approved for the site’s future use.   The reason for this was that whilst the building was empty and within the Council’s ownership the Authority was liable for the building and site’s maintenance including costs for making the site secure.  Referring to redundant sites listed in the report that were either owned by a Trust or their ownership were still under investigation the Lead Member advised that once sufficient time had elapsed, and if the trustees or their beneficiaries were still to be traced, the site(s) would be sold and the receipts held in trust until trustee issues were resolved.

Responding to members’ questions the Lead Member and officers –

·         advised that in future business cases submitted as bids for new school buildings presented to the Strategic Investment Group (SIG) and Cabinet would have to include details of what the Education Service proposed to do with any redundant assets or sites resulting from the proposal

·         confirmed that the County Council’s Charter with town and community councils required the Council to seek expressions of interest from town and community councils in any county-owned assets which were deemed to be surplus to requirements.  The County Council could offer to transfer a surplus asset to a town or community council who had a robust agreed business plan for its future use.  Officers from the Business Improvement and Modernisation Service (BIMS) would be available to town and community councils or constituted community groups to help them explore potential options and draw up the required business plan.  No asset would be transferred unless sufficient funding had been secured by the constituted body to operate the facility for the foreseeable future.  However, if a community facility already operated within that community the Council was unlikely to agree to transfer an asset to that community for a similar purpose

·         advised that once an asset was transferred to another council or constituted body the Council would not be liable for any costs associated with the asset in future.  If, at any point in the future, the organisation who had acquired the building/site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.